Skip to main content

Full text of "Volume III, Issue 1: Knight Letter No. 100"

See other formats



TAe Lewis Carroll Society of North America 


Spring 2018 

Volume III Issue 1 

Number 100 

The Knight Letter is the official magazine of the Lewis Carroll Society of North America, 
a literary society whose purpose is to encourage study and appreciation of the life, work, 
times, and influence of Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson), and is in affiliation 
with the Fales Library, New York University. 

It is published twice a year and is distributed free to all members. 

Editorial correspondence should be sent to 
the Editor in Chief at 


Submissions for The Rectory Umbrella and Mischmasch should be sent to 

Submissions and suggestions for Serendipidity and Sic , Sic, Sic should be sent to 

Submissions and suggestions for All Must Have Prizes should be sent to 

Submissions and suggestions for From Our Far-Flung Correspondents should be sent 

farflungknigh t@ gmail. com. 

© 2018 The Lewis Carroll Society of North America 
ISSN 0193-886X 

Chris Morgan, Editor in Chief 
Cindy Watter, Editor, Of Books and Things 
James Welsch, Editor, From Our Far-Flung Correspondents 
Foxxe Editorial Services, Copyeditor 
Mark Burstein, Production Editor 
Sarah Adams-Kiddy, Proofreader 
Andrew H. Ogus, Designer 



Stephanie Lovett, 

Linda Cassady, 


Sandra Lee Parker, 

Annual membership dues are U.S. $35 (regular), 

$50 (international), and $100 (sustaining). 

Subscriptions, correspondence, and inquiries should be addressed to: 

Sandra Lee Parker, LCSNA Secretary 
PO Box 197 

Annandale, Virginia 22003 

On the cover: Hickory Horned Devil on top of mushrooms. 
Photograph © 2018 Dr. Igor Siwanowicz (see page 19). 




- m - 

Lewis Carroll at the Doheny , or, “Hasten, 

Otherworldly Alice!” 1 


The Knight Letter: One Hundred 

and Counting 1 o 


Carroll’s Publishing History 

with Macmillan: A Research Narrative 14 


Of the Mushroom 19 


“Once I Was a Real Turtle, ” Part I 23 



- m - 

Leaves from the Deanery Garden — 

Serendipity — Sic, Sic, Sic 40 

Ravings from the Writing Desk 44 


All Must Have Prizes 46 


Arcane Illustrators: fan Svankmajer 48 


In Memoriam: David H. Schaefer 50 



- m - 

Mad World 52 


USC Libraries 14 th Wonderland Award 53 


The Straight Dope on the MMPI 54 

Never Eschew Escher 54 

Drive-by Laughter 54 

Dutch Society’s Second Symposium 55 


Burning the Baker 55 


Run, Alice, Run 56 


Alice in Orchidland 57 


Alice in Down-Underland 57 


Mad Hatterpiller 5 8 



Pulp Friction 59 

Jabberwalking 59 

Caryl: Why Lewis Carroll Believed in Fairies 59 


Mrs. White Rabbit 60 


The Fish Chronicles 60 


AW/LG illustrated by Gennady Kalinovski 61 


One Fun Day with Lewis Carroll 61 


Evertype 62 



Art & Illustration—Articles & Academia — 

Books — Events, Exhibits, & Places — 

Internet & Technology—Movies & Television — 
Music—Performing Arts—Things 63 

Hector Rosenfeld & “Alice in Puzzleland” 66 




elcome to the hundredth issue of the 
Knight Letterl To mark this special event, 
we offer this one-time oversized color is¬ 
sue as a gift to our members. We wish we could do this 
for every issue, but we hope you’ll enjoy the offerings 
herein, including an affectionate retrospective by Mark 
Burstein, an active participant in the KL for decades, 
and some thoughts from Stephanie Lovett. They look 
back at its beginnings as a small newsletter, and de¬ 
scribe its growth and evolution to the present day. 

It’s a major accomplishment for any periodical to 
last for 100 issues. The KL began in 1974, just before 
I became an editor at BYTE, an early personal-com¬ 
puting magazine. At the time, we were delighted to 
make it to issue #10, let alone #100! All credit for the 
KL s longevity goes to the countless LCSNA members 
who have volunteered their talents over the years to 
maintain our quality and relevance. 

In this issue, we offer a colorful mushroom 
theme with several intriguing caterpillars to admire. 
Our spring meeting report offers a rich set of presen¬ 
tations about all things Carrollian, including Linda 
Gray-Moin’s remarkable life-sized recreation of Mr. 
Dodgson’s hearthside in his rooms at Christ Church, 
complete with reproductions of the tiles on the 
hearth and the paintings displayed across his mantle. 

“Once I Was a Real Turtle,” by Matt Demakos, is 
a revealing analysis of John Tenniel’s post-publication 
drawings and tracings of his illustrations for the Alice 
books. The images, held at Harvard University (the 
Harcourt Amory Collection), the Morgan Library, 
New York University (the Berol Collection), and sev¬ 
eral other collections, are intriguing. Why were they 

created after the Alice books were published? Why are 
some reversed and some not? Why do some have ad¬ 
ditional images on them? Matt sheds new light on the 
topic through his recent research. 

Also in this issue, Goetz Kluge makes the case 
that a seventeenth-century engraving may have influ¬ 
enced Henry Holiday’s last illustration for The Hunt- 
ing of the Snark. Goetz’s excellent blog about all things 
Snark is at 

Earlier this year, we lost David Schaefer, a beloved 
friend to the Society for over four decades. In this is¬ 
sue’s “In Memoriam,” August Imholtz, Jr., offers a 
very personal look back at David’s remarkable life, his 
accomplishments in technology, and his many contri¬ 
butions to the LCSNA. 


David, and Maxine Schaefer 







T he second half of our tide is an anagram of 
the first: it inspired us to do likewise and 
hasten to the University of Southern Califor¬ 
nia’s wonderful Doheny Library in Los Angeles for 
our Spring meeting. (We have apparently caught Mr. 
Carroll’s anagram fever. A second anagram is “World¬ 
ly Alice Hearthstone,” and a re-creation of Carroll’s 
Oxford hearth was a particular highlight of our meet¬ 
ing. Coincidence?) 

Our LA adventure began on Thursday, April 12, 
with our semi-annual Schaefer Reading, this time 
held at the Castelar Elementary School, a Mandarin 
immersion school in a cheerful neighborhood not 
far from Chinatown. USC very hospitably provided 
a driver and a van for us. We were ushered into the 
gym, and soon forty-two (!) lively third-graders filed 
in. Our own Madison Hatta was the excellent mistress 
of ceremonies, welcoming the students and telling 
them the history of the Schaefer readings. There were 
sixteen grown-ups in attendance—probably a record. 
At the last minute, Daniel Singer strolled in, in full 
Victorian fig, complete with a top hat that was over a 
century old. Sartorially, he eclipsed us all. 

This reading was a first for the Society; instead of 
the customary adult performers, the children them¬ 
selves took turns reading Chapter 7, “A Mad Tea- 
Party,” in its entirety. Some of the children had great 
dramatic expression. (One little girl, who had prob¬ 

ably been told never to call anyone “stupid,” sponta¬ 
neously emended the text to “It’s the silliest tea-party 
I ever was at in all my life!”) Then Andy Gu, a stu¬ 
dent at USC—with a double major of Philosophy and 
Computer Science, of which Dodgson would certainly 
have approved—read the chapter in Mandarin. 

The Q ScA after the reading was, as always, fasci¬ 
nating and fun. Because the students had been given 
the books ahead of the reading, there were many 
questions about the illustrations, some of which were 
answered with “You will find out when you read the 
book.” They were curious about who this tall girl was 
(the stretched-neck Alice), why the dormouse slept all 
the time, why they were reading this chapter in partic¬ 
ular, what treacle was, how Carroll came up with the 
idea, and why the cat looked terrifying. This last was 
answered with a discussion of Tenniel’s style, and how 
the cat was supposed to be funny. The children were 
assured that Alice was never in any danger. We asked 
Mr. Gu how the parodies translated, as in “Twinkle, 
Twinkle Little Bat.” He replied that the translation, 
instead, went into a discussion about the importance 
of the poem “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star” in Anglo- 
American culture. 

One little boy, dressed all in green, bounced up 
and asked, in a mock-truculent manner, “Can we keep 
these books, or ‘Heck, no!’?” We told him that the pur¬ 
pose of the visit was to present them with this book, 


as Maxine and David Schaefer had always intended. 
After the reading, several of the students came over 
for a closer look at Cindy Watter’s sixty-year-old copy 
of the Alice books, marveling that it was still in decent 
condition. (She would have lectured them about tak¬ 
ing care of their own books, but Alice isn’t supposed 
to have a moral.) 

This was a poignant gathering for many of us, as 
David Schaefer had recently died, but both Schaefers 
would have been thrilled to see the enthusiasm with 
which the books were received. In his honor and with 
the full consent of his family, the event will from this 
point on be called the “Maxine and David Schaefer 
Memorial Reading.” 

Later in the day, we were free to browse the G. 
Edward Cassady, M.D., and Margaret Elizabeth Cas- 
sady, R.N, Lewis Carroll Collection, and were treated 
to a light reception at the Moreton Fig Outdoor Pa¬ 
tio, featuring many Alice-themed goodies, including 
Pig Sc Pepper Old Fashioneds to slake our thirsts. 

The next day, Friday, saw our gathering again tak¬ 
ing place in the Doheny. On our way up to the room, 
we paused to admire two of Karen Mortillaro’s fabu¬ 
lous anamorphic bronze sculptures, part of a series 
of twelve (one for each Wonderland chapter) she is 
creating (KL 91:6). USC Libraries’ Associate Dean for 
Programs and Planning Hugh McHarg and our presi¬ 
dent, Stephanie Lovett, welcomed us to the meeting, 
themed “Wonderland as Place: World-Building and 
Character-Making in the Carroll Universe.” 

Then we were off to a brilliant beginning, a 
performance of a truly delightful new musical, Mad 
World, putting us in a very upbeat mood. Daniel Rover 
Singer’s full review of it can be found on page 52. 

Next, Arnold Hirshon made his second appear¬ 
ance as a speaker at an LCSNA meeting (he was fea¬ 
tured at the Alice 150 event). He is an associate vice 
provost and the university librarian at Case Western 
Reserve University in Cleveland, and has traveled 
the world lecturing on libraries and library leader¬ 
ship, in addition to publishing many articles on those 
subjects. In his 2015 talk he had proposed a digital 
scholarship project, a database of Alice illustrations, 
which he is still committed to. This time he gave us 
“an early report in its beginning stages” in a talk en¬ 
titled “Beyond Tenniel, or Contrariwise: If It Wasn’t, 
Is It Ain’t?” 

It was an information-packed, fast-paced lecture 
full of erudition and enthusiasm—and 150 Power¬ 
Point slides! Hirshon’s goal is to create a systematic 
way to reveal the mind of the many illustrators of Car- 
roll’s Alice books. He is creating a comprehensive cat¬ 
alog and database that will list all of the illustrations 
that have appeared in any English-language book edi¬ 
tion of Wonderland and /or Looking-Glass published 
anywhere in the world since 1865 (and hi-res images 
of them all!!). Hirshon also plans to identify the first 
appearance of a scene or character or of a significant 
new detail. He believes Wonderland and Looking-Glass 
are the perfect case studies to examine the minds of 


Mad World 

illustrators, because in both works any scene, sen¬ 
tence, phrase, character, or word is ripe for distinctive 
visual representation. 

Hirshon showed the results of a formula he de¬ 
vised to calculate the total number of illustrations 
for all the books in the database: 90,967. He noted, 
jokingly, “I’m willing to bet I’m wrong. The nice 
thing about this crowd is that you’ll tell me.” He also 
showed us a table of words that appear only once or 
twice in Wonderland (among them, interestingly, is 
“twice,” which appears twice). 

He asked why any of this information should mat¬ 
ter. For “maniac” collectors it’s “Why should I get this?” 
For illustrators , “What can I say creatively that will en¬ 
hance the existing visual landscape of this book and 
please the reader?” The reader is curious about why, 
with so many versions available, a particular book will 
command attention. 

Hirshon’s approach relies on several factors, in¬ 
cluding knowing the first time a scene, character, or 
other feature has ever been illustrated. Also impor¬ 
tant is perceiving the highlighting of a text element 
no one ever noticed or could visualize before the em¬ 
ployment of a distinctive artistic style, the use of a new 
medium to express the work, or a medium used in a 
different way. For all the “firsts” that illustrators seek, 
the primary consideration is often fidelity to the text, 
though he notes that illustrators also often ask “What 
can I as an illustrator bring out from the text that no 
one has ever brought before?” 

He then discussed in fascinating detail a num¬ 
ber of editions that featured first-time illustrations of 
scenes—or broad interpretations of the text—includ¬ 
ing W. H. Walker’s picture of Alice as serpent; Brins¬ 
ley Le Fanu’s illustration of the March Hare’s house, 
with ears coming through the roof; K. M. Roberts’s 
black-and-white drawing of Alice aiming to catch an 
airborne baby; Charles Pears’s and Thomas Heath 
Robinson’s firsts of the Hatter standing on the tea- 
table and a platter soaring through the air at Alice; 
Harry Rountree’s drawings of a flamingo with a steam- 
punk aesthetic and a mother pigeon facing off with a 
python; Bessie Pease Gutmann’s childlike, innocent 
Alice; rarely seen drawings done by Harry Furniss; 
and art by R. E. McEune. 


Linda Gray-Moin in front 
of her re-creation of 
Dodgson’s hearth. 

We next had a special treat when artist Linda Gray- 
Moin revealed a project she had been working on for 
some time: a life-size, faithful re-creation of the hearth- 
side in the rooms at Christ Church that Dodgson occu¬ 
pied from 1868 until his death in 1898. Her talk was 
titled “Fantastic Ducks and Blooming Maidens: A Visit 
to Mr. Dodgson’s Hearthside.” Linda not only painted 
remarkable likenesses of the William De Morgan tiles 
surrounding the fireplace and the five oil paintings 
hanging above it, she reconstructed the entire fire¬ 
place itself, complete with burning coal, andirons, 
fender, and so forth. 

But before we saw her consummate re-creation, 
before we even listened to Linda describe how her 
project came about, she dimmed the lights and con¬ 
jured up the scene that so many children must have 
experienced, sitting before Lewis Carroll’s hearth, 
flames flickering and animating the figures on the 
tiles and the five young girls wreathed in blossoms 
painted in oils above, while Carroll told them stories. 
To further re-create the atmosphere, she played for us 
the 1957 Cyril Ritchard recording of the beginning of 
Alice’s adventures. As a child, she said, it was through 
Ritchard’s recordings that she first fell in love with 
Carroll’s wit and whimsy. 

Then we stepped back to pinpoint the location of 
Dodgson’s Christ Church suite of rooms, in the north¬ 
west corner of Tom Quad. The suite was fairly expen¬ 
sive at six guineas per term (about £800 or $1,100 dol¬ 
lars in today’s money), but Wonderlands as selling well 
when he moved there in 1868. Linda had herself vis¬ 
ited this suite during the first International Lewis Car¬ 

roll Conference in the summer of 1989. She showed a 
photo, probably taken shortly after Dodgson’s death, 
which appears in the Dover reprint of Isa Bowman’s 
memoir, titled Lewis Carroll as I Knew Him. (We should 
note here that the photo in the Dover book correctly 
shows Dodgson’s sitting room in 1868-98, although 
it is incorrectly captioned as the room where Wonder¬ 
land was written. The original 1899 edition of Bow¬ 
man’s memoir, titled The Story of Lewis Carroll , has a 
different photo, showing the room Dodgson actually 
occupied when he wrote his classic.) 

Linda had carefully examined the photo with a 
powerful magnifying glass, which was especially im¬ 
portant for her re-creation of the De Morgan tiles 
in the fireplace surround. The tiles were not special- 
ordered by Carroll, but purchased from stock in 
1887, probably because they echo characters from his 
stories—fawn, dodo, lory, eaglet, Jabberwock (argu¬ 
ably) , beaver. Child friend Enid Stevens recalled, “As I 
sat on Mr. Dodgson’s knee before the fire, he used to 
make the creatures have long and very amusing con¬ 
versations between themselves.” Enid thought the lit¬ 
tle ducks on the tiles (De Morgan named them “Fan¬ 
tastic Ducks”) perhaps represented the Little Birds 
in Sylvie and Bruno. Linda pointed out two characters 
on the sailing ship on the upper tiles, who just might 
be Dodgson in his top hat and Queen Alice with her 
scepter sailing off to further adventures! After Dodg¬ 
son’s death, the De Morgan tiles remained in position 
for a few years; later, some of the tiles were re-made 
into a screen, which is now in the Senior Common 
room at Christ Church. 


Before discussing the five paintings of “blooming 
maidens” that she painstakingly rendered, Linda pro¬ 
vided background on the appearances of the hearth 
in Carroll’s works and the role of the visual arts in 
his life. He frequently attended art exhibitions, knew 
many artists personally, himself tried his hand at illus¬ 
tration throughout his life, and even gave Lucy Wal¬ 
ters, a neighbor’s daughter, funds so she could study 
with Hubert von Herkomer. Dodgson was personally 
acquainted (we believe) with all the artists represent¬ 
ed above his mantelpiece. All five paintings were pur¬ 
chased when he was in his early thirties. 

Starting from the right side, the first (and most 
well-known) painting is Lady with the Lilacs , painted in 
1863 by Arthur Hughes. Dodgson paid a lot—£26/5, 
around $4,000 in today’s money—for it. It is likely 
that Tryphena Hughes, who often modeled for her 
husband, was the sitter. Dodgson bought the paint¬ 
ing about the same time he was working on his Linder 
Ground illustrations, and Tryphena’s luxurious wavy 
hair may have influenced his drawings. Linda used a 
color checker app to help her paint a color-accurate 
copy. The original painting currently hangs in the Art 
Gallery of Ontario in Toronto. (Dayna Nuhn gave 
an excellent talk about it at our Fall 2014 meeting 
[KL 93:1]; Christopher Tyler also discussed it at the 
Spring 2017 one [XL 98:10]). 

The second painting from the right, Minnie 
Morton , is by Sophie Anderson. (In fact, two of the 
mantle paintings are by Anderson, whose work Dodg¬ 
son much admired.) Anderson was born in France in 
1823 and came to England in 1854. She exhibited fre¬ 
quently at the British Institution and the Royal Acade¬ 
my. It is unknown to whom the title refers, but a friend 
of Dodgson’s suggested that the model was Florence 
Braithwaite, a girl about the same age as Alice Liddell. 
Dodgson purchased this in June 1864; he later gave it 
to his sister Mary as a wedding gift, and had Anderson 
make a copy for himself. Because neither painting’s 
whereabouts are known, Linda had to “create” the 
colors for her rendition, working from a photograph 
taken by Dodgson, now at Princeton University; she 
chose colors that echo those of the De Morgan tiles 
and the general hearthside environment. 

The second Anderson piece, on the other side 
of the fireplace, is Girl with Lilacs , painted in 1865. 
Dodgson saw it on a visit to the Anderson home and 
was charmed by it. The model was Elizabeth Turnbull, 
a beautiful child of twelve, who was employed by An¬ 
derson as a domestic helper and sitter. Dodgson was 
inspired to make a photograph of her in the same at¬ 
titude as the painting two weeks later, in July 1865, but 
the photograph has not been located. It’s interesting 
that lilacs appear again as a theme. 

The central, and largest, painting, Waiting to 
Skate , is based on Dodgson’s photograph of Alexan¬ 

dra “Xie” Kitchin dressed as a Dane, a particular fa¬ 
vorite of his, and is by Alice Emily Donkin, a cousin 
of Dodgson’s brother Wilfred’s wife. This is a case in 
which Linda departed from faithful reproduction. 
She finds Donkin’s painting too idealized and not a 
good likeness, so she created her own interpretation 
of the photograph of Xie. However, she had the bene¬ 
fit of suggestions that Dodgson wrote to Xie’s mother, 
should she want to have the photograph tinted: “(1) 
the eyes not quite so light; (2) the complexion not so 
fair and colourless; (3) the lips not so bright a red; (4) 
the hair not so golden, but brown, tipped with gold; 
(5) the dress not quite so bright a blue; (6) the frock 
warm brown, not black; (7) the corners of the mouth 
more decidedly marked, so as to give more firmness.” 

Our last painting, on the far left, shows a robed 
figure standing in a three-quarters pose. The repro¬ 
duced photograph of it is too dark, small, and blurry 
to positively identify it, but Linda wondered whether 
it might be a painting of Saint Cecilia by Thomas 
Heaphy that Dodgson owned, although in the cata¬ 
logue of his effects sold at auction, the painting is re¬ 
ferred to as “Infant St. Cecilia.” When casting about 
for a subject that made sense for this spot over the 
mantle, Linda came upon a photograph of Alice Lid¬ 
dell as St. Agnes by Julia Margaret Cameron. It was 
the right pose and dress, and a subject dear to Dodg- 
son’s heart, so she went with it, painting it in oil, just 
adding a window over the figure’s shoulder. 

After Linda’s talk, we were able to proceed di¬ 
rectly to lunch in the Intellectual Commons Room 
and view the entire magnificent hearthside installa¬ 
tion in person. (At this point you may wish to look 
at the photo on the facing page, where you can get 
an idea of the beauty—and accuracy—of her work.) 
It will return to Linda’s painting studio, where it will 
serve as the backdrop to other Carrollian projects she 
is hatching. 

In the afternoon, the always delightful Heather 
Simmons (whose Alice Is Everywhere podcast [XL 98:53] 
is a weekly treat, along with her blog) hosted a “Pop- 
Up Wonderland,” in which attendees were asked to 
briefly (within 3 minutes and 42 seconds) show some 
of our “prizes,” defined as Carrollian things that were 
amusing or significant to us, not necessarily our most 
rare or valuable. Some of the items were physically 
present; others shown on screen. 

Ricardo Jaramillo gave us a slideshow about Rizo, 
his pet hedgehog; Jon Sakamoto, of the Walt Disney 
Family Museum in San Francisco, brought some Mary 
Blair postcards (they had an exhibition of her work 
in 2014); Mark Burstein showed a bronze belt buckle 
from the 1960s that had the Hatter raising a teacup 
on one side and a working hashish pipe incorporat¬ 
ing the cup on the back, plus a plastic Disney figurine 
of the White Rabbit and the Hatter engaged in rather 


Photo by Mark Burstein 

dubious behavior; Cindy Watter brought a Grosset & 
Dunlap copy of Alice she had had since she was seven 
and has had many prominent Carrollians autograph 
(“If this book could talk, I’d probably be in jail”); An¬ 
gelica Carpenter brought two tea towels from Dares- 
bury and a coffee cup from the superb Alice exhibit 
in Fresno in 2004; Dan Singer had a plastic figurine 
from Walt Disney World in Florida with the Hare, the 
Dormouse, and the Hatter, who was, oddly enough, 
playing a saxophone; Karen Mortillaro talked about 
anamorphic art, reflection and illusion, and distort¬ 
ing mirrors, holding up one Dodgson had owned, 
from the Cassady Collection; Amy Plummer exhibit¬ 
ed a one-off of a stained-glass Cheshire Cat her father 
had made for her; August Imholtz brought a book by 
Byron Sewell with a fork embedded in its binding and 
told us he would have brought another, this one with 
a nine-inch nail in it, but was afraid of transporting it 
through the TSA; Joel Birenbaum showed us a small 
sculpture of a passed-out Dormouse by Graham Pig- 
go tt, an anonymous one of the White Knight and Alice — 
with, inexplicably, a quote from Le Petit Prince (“On ne 
voit bien qu’avec le coeur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les 
yeux. ”)—and a “Rollin’ Down the Rabbit Hole” mari¬ 
juana tray; April James showed a Johnny Depp Hatter 
clock from the movie that initially got her into the 
Carrollian universe, and a journal of poetry by her al¬ 
ter ego, Madison Hatta; Robert Watkins, a math pro¬ 
fessor at Reiser University in Florida, showed us some 
slides of his “Roots of Postmodernism” class involv¬ 
ing Alice; Stephanie Lovett had Twelve Carroll Scholars 
Read Alice , an LCSJapan product from 1999 contain¬ 
ing two cassettes and a booklet, and also showed us 
Mahendra Singh’s fabulous graphic-novel-style Snark ; 
and Linda Cassady brought some postcards from the 

White Knight and Alice from the Birenbaum Collection 





Martzi Campos 

Wonderland Awards, which she kindly distributed to 

Next, we saw a presentation of the 2015 first-place 
Wonderland award winner, “ Curiouser and Curiouser. 
An Interactive Storybook and Experimental Game- 
play Experience.” Martzi Campos, who developed the 
project along with Yu ting Su, spoke about and dem¬ 
onstrated this combination pop-up book and interac¬ 
tive computer experience, connected to a laptop by 
a USB cable. In 2014, she and her teammate in the 
Master of Fine Arts program in interactive media and 
games both wished to combine physical computing 
(microcontrollers, buttons, sensors, etc.) and their 
love of books to create a Wonderland- themed pop-up 
book with an interactive computer game. They were 
amazed and inspired by the Cassady collection, as 
well as previous entries to the competition, and were 
surprised to learn that Carroll himself was a game de¬ 
signer. Months of hard work, including scavenging 
parts from interactive greeting cards, enabled them 
to develop a large, sturdily constructed, handmade 
pop-up book. 

Elements of Carroll’s story are featured in both 
the hand-drawn art of the pop-up book and the com¬ 
puter animation, which interacts with the electron¬ 
ics embedded in the book. As the book opens to the 
Hall of Doors, pop-ups appear and narration begins 
on the computer, explaining the scene and giving in¬ 
structions, with hints encouraging exploration on the 
page or screen. As you press on the drink me bottle 
or eat me cake in the book, Alice grows or shrinks on 
the computer screen to the appropriate size for the 


Kerim Yasar, Satoko Shimazaki, & Rebecca Corbett 

several different doors available on the screen. Be¬ 
hind each door is a scene from one of the chapters; 
for example, when you press on the key in the book, 
music plays as the doors open to show “Pig and Pep¬ 
per,” with the baby turning into a pig. The smallest 
door leads to the next page—the Caterpillar. 

Just as Carroll sometimes wanted to explain some 
math to a young child at a dinner party, the Cater¬ 
pillar wishes to do the same, in a fun way. This page 
integrates the game play into the book rather than 
presenting it on the screen. As you pull on tabs on 
the mushroom in the book, Alice’s neck stretches or 
shrinks on the screen. But in the book you can also 
pull on Alice’s head to stretch her paper neck. Sets 
of tangrams (a puzzle consisting of flat geometric 
shapes that are put together to form objects) are in 
a removable envelope addressed to Alice’s feet. The 
tangrams are assembled while on-screen characters 
prompt with different-sized rabbits (what else?!) for 
each set of tangrams. 

The last page is a finger-controlled croquet game 
that uses a ring on your finger to flick the hedgehog in 
the book through wickets on the screen and to scroll 
past several characters who speak and comment, until 
Alice declares, ‘You’re nothing but a pack of cards!” 
and game play ends. A tiny paper book inside the 
pop-up book explains the rules of the game, ensuring 
that both written word and computer animation are 
used to engage the player. 

After being chosen for the Wonderland award, 
Ms. Campos and Ms. Su were invited to present 
their project at the Experimental Game Play Work¬ 
shop, the Game Developer Conference, and the 
Electronic Entertainment Expo. Ms. Campos ex¬ 
pressed her appreciation for helping them become 
game designers. 

After a short break, Rebecca Corbett, Japanese 
Studies librarian at USC, led a discussion called “On 
Translating Whimsy and Nonsense in East Asian Lan¬ 
guages and Cultures,” featuring panelists Kerim Yasar 

and Satoko Shimazaki, both professors of East Asian 
Languages and Cultures at USC. 

The panelists began by introducing themselves. 
Satoko’s research focuses on all-male Kabuki theater 
and also on female ghost plays, some of which incor¬ 
porate themes similar to those in Alice. She teaches 
early modern and contemporary Japanese literature 
to undergraduates, and she finds that Alice is a key 
figure for different Japanese cultural groups. 

Kerim, who taught English in Japan, has a music 
background that evolved into his studies of Japanese 
literature, media, film, and sound technology. Cur¬ 
rently working on a book about Japanese cinema, he 
has translated many novels and subtitles for movies. 
He feels that Alice resonates deeply with Japanese cul¬ 
tural interests. 

Asked her impression of Japanese components 
in the Cassady collection, Satoko said that she was 
amazed to see so many artists, translators, and others 
interested in Alice. Alice offers food for artistic and 
literary interpretation, she noted. Kerim said he was 
surprised notjust by the sheer number of translations, 
but also by their wide range. He mentioned manga, 
kamishibai (paper card-based street theater, popular 
until the advent of television), video games, animated 
works, and almost any kind of media. Rebecca added 
shadow puppets, stickers, and the Gothic Lolita look 
inspired by Alice. 

Interest in Alice started early, Satoko said, when 
Japan opened to foreigners in 1868. Visitors brought 
Alice books, which were translated. These proved en¬ 
tertaining for both children and intellectuals. In the 
1970s, Japanese Alice translations filled a need for 
readers looking for something interesting and dark. 
Alice is a metaphor, she thinks. An artist may see her¬ 
self as a girl in Alice and better understand herself. 
She suggested that Yayoi Kusama’s infinity mirror 
rooms at the Broad Museum of Contemporary Art 
in Los Angeles may let viewers see both infinity and 


Kerim thinks the Japanese like Alice for its play¬ 
ful qualities. The 1951 Disney animated film marked 
a turning point, when translations began to increase 
dramatically, resulting today in at least 425 different 
translations of both Alice books, the most in any lan¬ 
guage. In 1951, when Japan was still under U.S. oc¬ 
cupation, Alice was perceived as ambiguously Anglo- 
American. Disney animation had been popular in 
Japan before the war, but its Alice in Wonderland movie 
spurred on the popularity of the Alice books, part of a 
massive influx of American culture. Kerim mentioned 
the Japanese tradition of monsters called yokai, which 
resemble Lewis Carroll’s magical beings. And he 
thinks that Alice is popular in Japan because cuteness 
(kawaii) is popular there, especially cute little girls. 

Satoko noted that at the turn of the twentieth 
century, Alice was published in Japanese girls’ maga¬ 
zines. At that time girls attended girls-only schools, 
where they felt free. Boyfriends were not an issue, as 
the magazines selected “safe” stories to publish. (Ker¬ 
im noted that early translations played down Alice’s 
willfulness.) In the 1970s, manga for children became 
popular. One theory is that older women, now good 
wives and wise mothers, like to read about their lost 
girl culture. 

Kerim described one translation begun by 
Akutagawa Ryunosuke, a well-known author who 
killed himself while writing it; his editor finished it. 
Kerim observed that wordplay is very hard to trans¬ 
late. It depends on similar-sounding words with mul¬ 
tiple meanings, but secondary and tertiary meanings 
don’t carry across languages. Translators may try to 
render “mock turtle” as “imitation” or “fake” turtle, 
but a subtler effort might use the term ju , meaning 
“in the style of’ the sea turtle. This translation makes 
an allusion to the Yahoo in Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s 
Travels , a connection that might be recognized by an 
erudite Japanese reader (but not by a Yahoo). Trans¬ 
lators, he explained, must use the resources of the 
language they are transforming the work into. 

Early Alice translations created an educational 
narrative to teach Japanese children about English 
culture. Some early versions replaced chess with the 
more familiar Japanese game of shogi, but later trans¬ 
lations kept chess in the story to teach people about 
Western ways. Satoko said that early translations tar¬ 
geted children, leaving out wordplay. Later transla¬ 
tions brought in wordplay and sophistication. 

Nonsense, Kerim added, is easier to translate 
than wordplay, because the effort is in preserving the 
flavor of the original. 

When it came time for questions from the audi¬ 
ence, people discussed the Japanese culture of cuteness. 
Mark Burstein pointed out that “Hello Kitty” was named 
for Alice’s cat in Through the Looking-Glass (KL 95:22), 
which was a pleasant surprise to Ms. Satoko, who taught 

classes on both of them! Satoko advised that in Japan 
there is a chain of stores called “Alice on Wednesday,” 
which marries cuteness, Alice, and good shopping. 

We then moseyed down to a different room in 
the Special Collections wing to browse a special ex¬ 
hibit of items from the Cassady collection, curated by 
Rebecca Corbett, Kerim Yasar, Satako Shimazaki, and 
Dr. George Cassady. Certainly the most predominant 
thing in the room was an enormous oil portrait, per¬ 
haps seven feet tall, based on the famous Julia Marga¬ 
ret Cameron photo of Alice Liddell as Pomona, sur¬ 
rounded by Tenniel images from the books. Specific 
tables were devoted to “Whimsy and Nonsense in East 
Asian Languages and Cultures,” “Carroll’s Library,” 
and “Carroll Illustrators.” “Whimsy” helped to inform 
the talk we had just heard by showing us examples that 
had been discussed; “Library” contained books CLD 
had owned, from an Insogni Pastorali from 1596 up to 
nineteenth-century works, including some of his own 
writings and pamphlets; and “Illustrators” showcased 
Carroll’s wide range of interpreters, including a copy 
of a rare Argentine boxed edition (25 copies) with il¬ 
lustrations by Alicia Scavino and a boxed Snark hand¬ 
written and illustrated with colored drypoint etchings 
by Yuri Shtapakov, which had come out in an edition 
of two! George also had written and generously print¬ 
ed up full-color spiral-bound catalogs of the latter two 
categories, which were there for the taking. 

Next came the 2018 Wonderland Award ceremo¬ 
ny, which Linda Cassady reports about on page 53. 
Following that was another bountiful reception in the 

On Saturday morning, we were again welcomed 
to the Doheny Library, with a light breakfast. Anne- 
Marie Maxwell then led us on a curator’s tour of the 
exhibition of some of the previous Wonderland Award 
entrants and winners. Titled Wonderlands capes and 
located on the ground floor of the library in several 
glass cases built into the lobby and hallway walls, this 
show was a marvel of variety and, well, wonder. High¬ 
lights included an elaborate—and wearable—dress, a 
Carrollian Last Supper (opposite), an exquisite scrap¬ 
book journal, a large mural, and a piece of book art 
carved out of a new copy of Alice. One favorite was a 
pair of paintings of Alice inspired by Victorian enam¬ 
eled miniatures, captivating in their beauty and in 
their inherent questioning of whether they portray 
the same girl—and if so, which is the real one and 
which the mirror-world fairy? Our group appreciated 
Ms. Maxwell’s expertise as we made our way through 
the explosion of creativity, not only from the point 
of view of artistic interpretation of Carrollian sources, 
but also from that of a collector’s/archivist’s interest 
in the storage and display of unusual materials. 

The final presentation of our multi-day program 
was an illustrated and animated, if you will pardon 


Photo by Mark Burstein 

Anne-Marie Maxwell (L) & 
Lisa Mann (R) 

the pun, talk by Lisa Mann, an associate professor at 
the USC School of Cinematic Arts, and Anne-Marie 
Maxwell of the Planning and Communications De¬ 
partment of the Doheny Library: “Lewis Carroll in 
the Animation and Media-Based Installation Curric¬ 
ulum.” The term “installation art,” according to the 
Tate Gallery’s art glossary, “is used to describe large- 
scale, mixed-media constructions, often designed for 
a specific place or for a temporary period of time.” 
The art medium in question at USC, however, was 
animation, which is defined as “the rapid display of 
sequences of static imagery in such a way as to create 
the illusion of movement,” which for many people, 
especially those of an older generation, means car¬ 
toons. Animation is made up of 24 frames per second, 
amounting to a lot of images for even a short film. 

The speakers first showed a swirling Alice ani¬ 
mation sequence that seemed somewhat reminis¬ 
cent of Felix the Cat (whose giant neon image is 
positioned above a car dealership a few blocks up 
on South Figueroa Street). There followed a quasi¬ 
psychedelic twirling Alice inspired by Salvador Dali, 
a work which was later submitted to the cutting-edge 
Ottawa Animation Festival. Wonderland Unbound was 
the title of a two-hour-long nighttime projection map¬ 
ping of scenes from Wonderland onto the fagade of 

the Doheny Library. The shots we saw were impressive 
indeed and surely more so in the real event. A short 
presentation featuring the Jabberwock, Alice in the 
pool of tears, and much more is available at 
tube. com / watch ?v=G8QGwLGAl-s. 

Going inside the magnificent Doheny Library on 
screen, we saw a series of students’ cleverly projected 
installations, ranging from butterflies flying on the 
stairwell pursued by grasping hands and a prowling 
cat, through animated open card catalog drawers and 
Alice figures digitally inserted in wall niches, to a Jab¬ 
berwock 3D laser-cut sculpture. The most wonderful 
and most Carrollian installation was surely the ani¬ 
mated water swirling around in a pool of tears in what 
had been a dry and disabled drinking fountain, cre¬ 
ated by Sara Fenton, a graduate student at the USC 
School of Cinematic Arts, which won the first prize in 
the 2016 competition. Certainly all of the animation 
makers seemed deserving of a prize, if even only an 
elegant thimble. 

Our thanks to the LCSNA members who generously con¬ 
tributed to this report: Mark Burstein, Angelica Carpenter, 
Clare Imholtz, August A. Imholtz,Jr., Stephanie Lovett, 
Robert Stek, and Cindy Waiter. 

Carroll and Friends by 
Juliet Devette, 2015 Won¬ 
derland Awards, on display 
at USC 


The Knight Letter: One Hundred and Counting 


hat’s an organization without a news¬ 
letter? The first issue of the Knight Let¬ 
ter , dated August 1974, appeared eight 
months after our fabled inaugural meeting in Princ¬ 
eton. It was edited by the president, Stan Marx, and 
consisted of three photocopied text pages (on or- 
ange-ish paper), beginning with a credo: 

The first issue of every publication is launched 
with a combination of innocence, hope, daring 
and determination. To explain each of these 
sensations would take 
more space than this 
issue. Sufficient to 
say—we would like 
The Knight Letter to be 
an expression of our 
membership, since its 
purpose is to inform, 
and no editor has 
the capacity to know 
everything that’s hap¬ 
pening in the Carrol- 
lian world. What fol¬ 
lows—and will follow, 
in future issues—is 
a compilation from 
many of our members, 
of events, transactions 
and reports that touch 
on our mutual interest. 

There were tidbits on new 
Alice items for sale, reviews 
(books, a rock opera), an 
obituary (Alfred Berol), 
notes on conferences and 
lectures, and a “trading 
post.” The seed was planted. 

Our second issue featured the first images. The 
fourth issue was mistakenly called “#3.” These early 
efforts, usually four or six pages, were certainly find¬ 
ing their way, mixing short articles with items and 
reviews, sometimes typewritten, sometimes typeset. 
Some were grouped together under headings such as 
“The Printed Page,” “Shopping Guide,” “Carrollian 

Computing,” and the like. Number 7 had the first 
actual report on a Society meeting, which thereafter 
became a tradition. 

Number 27 was a watershed issue that saw several 
new developments: the first issue edited by someone 
(Stan Marx) other than the serving president (Ed¬ 
ward Guiliano), and the first to be typeset and de¬ 
signed in columns. Edward writes: 

From the start, Stan and I managed a number of 
the Society undertakings as we could easily meet 
in person as I worked a mile 
from where he lived. A little 
newsletter was an important 
communication to keep 
people feeling part of the 
organization. With the 
help of a small inner circle, 
Stan gathered the informa¬ 
tion and got it into print 
for Maxine to distribute. 

Stan’s profession was 
advertising, so he clearly 
knew printers and han¬ 
dled the early graphics 
for the society. The de¬ 
sign and typesetting were 
his responsibility, which 
he outsourced. A small 
group of us did some re¬ 
view and editing before 
it went to print. But in 
those days, unlike today, 
it was a modest publica¬ 
tion and just something 
to reach those members 
who could not attend 
meetings or wanted cur¬ 
rent Carroll and Alice news. Over time, the 
list of contributors grew. 

Stan probably went to a printer or even 
a copy shop at that time for a style update. 

And that was the period when everyone was 
now using desktop publishing software. But 
to be fair all around, drafts of the KL were 


k4 lX an iL-%MVl l MOT 1 - 

Of -ibMrr-AdJIC* 

TUfVrii— af fi-ft a l » WI T » |j i p IN l i ■fch ■ ■ ^■ p u r ia 
Tft J lUl Ef 

■t’Ar«.:r i* u-r 3i, jpth, u 

J H Ph.1 f, kin torn jprmjUn p«ru-J Itm I 
lb- Wr prrrtr &*** Alin L«Mri) U w lan n . 

ijU|> Lit IkJ 

am mU.wmia.Md Kiii *+ put it- pmmtml muImi Alfed Vr kmJ. 

r«.. j -*bl « 4» bM4M- :Hih tv U4 tam « 

ifc-Li md iad LfMibi Virtu* m uri Jb 

U.|jriHi< L^Nwrl^jikl zmt b^tniUM Ui Mirrvd. Ill kid ii iew 
q 1 k I MtyJdnw. m niJ iir« rf U> i>n k,-jimli rohi. 

mtdHbwnr UkIw kT liwnln lifl iU b ki 

M Mi AWPWI P «** P 

■ ■i puiktoiki Whi< ika.d' k*.*a Liba U fdJd b. y 

P™ Lnu, nib T„* Ti*— i 'i U 

, mi bu* b fuikirf kyl il py * 

ii-iUiUi few nMItll Alai, aul U - nMiidw 

tiifjtyyiVrimwv Im Wf.unpnv'-ita kw i Lun> lUi>rtku F 
-rtkbrtaaa 11 i j i ichliii - * HU V PtarlMri- UM* j ihof ii 

?-Lta.i fat.jahib.fkLM, HHlWi hind ba -n ■ 

routinely shared with members of the execu¬ 
tive committee, and everyone then and now 
seemed content with the state of the KL. 

Number 27 also printed the first comic strip, and in¬ 
augurated two columns that continue to this day: “Of 
Books and Things” and “From Our Far-Flung Corre¬ 
spondents.” It had the first of a series of member pro¬ 
files (which continued through #39), and contained 
an image (possibly from Punch) of a blind man behind 
a large book that proclaimed the date of our next 
meeting; the blind man was replaced by the White 
Rabbit as Herald beginning in #36. Number 35 had 
the first “Carrollian Notes” column. 

Charlie Lovett writes: 

I took over from Stan Marx when I became pres¬ 
ident, beginning with #36 in the winter of 1991. 
Stan had done a great job with a professional 
designer and typesetter giving the KL a better 
look, and I copied this appearance on desktop 
publishing software, PageMaker, thus saving us 
quite a bit of money. I instituted an editorial in 
#37 and expanded the 
format to eight pages, 
giving us space for some 
longer articles such as 
a lengthy obituary of 
Eva Le Gallienne and 
an article on Foreign 
Alices. Issue 42 included 
a humorous insert under 
the banner “The Car¬ 
rollian Enquirer,” which 
poked fun at some 
of our good-natured 
members as we paid 
tribute to CLD’s favorite 
number. My final issue 
(#48, Autumn 1994) 
coincided with the end 
of my term as president 
and included accounts of 
some of the exhibits and 
activities associated with 
the Second International 
Lewis Carroll Confer¬ 
ence at Wake Forest 
University in Winston- 
Salem, North Carolina. 

At that conference, I was asked by August Imholtz 
on behalf of the board if I would take over the reins 
of the Knight Letter. I am not sure exactly why—I had 
only edited one book and had a few years’ experience 
on small newsletters: Ylem: Artists Using Technology and 

The Herald for the West Coast Chapter of our Society 
(1979-87)—but I did as best I could, and it has cer¬ 
tainly taught me a useful skill, one that I have turned 
into a second career, and for which I will be forever 
grateful. With the resignation of Janet Jurist as pro¬ 
gram director, it was felt that the presidential duties, 
which henceforth would incorporate meeting plan¬ 
ning, would be more than enough without having to 
produce the KL as well. 

I put #49 together, again using PageMaker. Num¬ 
ber 50 introduced a quotation section called “Seren¬ 
dipity.” Number 51 was the first time the KL had gone 
over 8 pages, this one weighing in at 12, and it initiat¬ 
ed the first letters to the editor column, “Leaves from 
the Deanery Garden,” and the presidential “Ravings 
from the Writing Desk of_.” 

The first pictorial cover was for #54, a fine scratch- 
board portrait of the Frog Footman by Leslie Allen, 
who had contributed four other drawings to previous 
KL s. Number 55 (16 pages), also featuring a cover by 
Leslie, saw the first publication in English of an essay 
on Carroll by Jorge Luis Borges. The page count con¬ 
tinued to climb in #56 (24 pages), a trend that con¬ 
tinues to our 52-to-60-page 
issues today. Number 61 was 
devoted to the first publica¬ 
tion of Carroll’s marionette 
play La Guida di Bragia , il¬ 
lustrated by Jonathan Dixon. 
Number 63 was accompa¬ 
nied by the first issue of The 
TumTum Tree , edited by the 
eleven-year-old Mickey Salins 
(David and Maxine Schae¬ 
fer’s grandson) and aimed 
at juvenile readers. He con¬ 
tinued editing it (his sister, 
Lena, soon joined him in this 
capacity) through #74. 

In #66, I pleaded for 
help, due to the imminent 
arrival of the Hare Appar¬ 
ent, my son Martin, saying I 
was doing my best to avoid 
the “Burnand antimetabole” 
(Francis Burnand [1836- 
1917] was the first editor of 
Punch to be knighted; I was 
not eager to become the first 
editor of the Knight Letter to be punched). Of course, 
each issue had many contributors, writers, and the oc¬ 
casional illustrator, but I wanted a staff. 

One fateful day in 2003, at an antiquarian book 
fair, I ran into my old friend Andrew Ogus, a book 
designer by trade and one of the original members of 
the West Coast Chapter of our Society. He expressed 

interest in designing the Knight Letter , and his kind of¬ 
fer was accepted. Working in close editorial collabora¬ 
tion with Matt Demakos, many of whose ideas these 
were, we implemented many changes in #71, which we 
also proclaimed Volume II Issue 1. First, it was “cleft in 
twain,” with longer, substantive articles constituting a 
section called “The Rectory Umbrella” and a miscella¬ 
nea called “Misch-Masch,” both named after Carroll’s 
family magazines. We also inaugurated a table of con¬ 
tents, a copyright/indicia page, and the basic design 
template that survives to this day. It was “signed” on 
the back cover by a backwards-facing rabbit; later edi¬ 
tors received their own “signatures.” All we were miss¬ 
ing to make it a “real” publication was an ISSN, which 
we got with #72. Furthermore, we decided to stabilize 
on two issues per year, Spring and Fall, corresponding 
to our meeting schedule. Andrew’s Victorian sensibili¬ 
ties, typefaces, wit, design talents, and one hundred 
year run of Punch from which he gets appropriate spot 
art have made all the differ¬ 

Beginning with #74, 
other members have served 
as editors of departments 
or sections, or as associate 
editors: Sarah Adams-Kiddy, 

Ann Buki, Patricia Colacino, 

Matthew Demakos, Rachel 
Eley, August Imholtz, Clare 
Imholtz, Ray Kiddy, James 
Welsch, and Cindy Watter. 

Foxxe Editorial Services has 
provided copyediting since 
#68. Desne Ahlers served 
as proofreader for issues 
#74-78, which Sarah Adams- 
Kiddy has done since. 

Martin Gardner’s anno¬ 
tations subsequent to those 
in the “Definitive Edition” 
of The Annotated Alice ap¬ 
peared in #s 75 and 76. 

When my work/life 
equilibrium became a bit 
too unbalanced with the 
arrival of yet another new 
family member (Sonja), Andrew Sellon (then also 
LCSNA president) took over as editor-in-chief with 
#78 (his signature was the Bellman’s bell), working in 
close collaboration with Clare (and occasionally Au¬ 
gust) Imholtz, as editors of “The Rectory Umbrella,” 
and Sarah Adams, as editor of “MischMasch.” Andrew 
renamed the editorial “The Bellman’s Speech” and 
initiated three new columns: “All Must Have Prizes” 
(collectibles), written by Joel Birenbaum, “Jabbering 
and Jam” (notes from our secretary), and “Notes and 

Queries.” These last two were attempts to bring in 
more information about members and greater reader 
participation (and should be revived!). 

Andrew and team made a push to have more 
speakers from LCSNA meetings (such as Nancy Wil¬ 
lard, Oleg Lipchenko, and Amirouche Moktefi) turn 
their talks into KL articles, and to include longer and 
more substantive book reviews. They also solicited ar¬ 
ticles from “outside” experts, such as bibliographer 
Cary Sternick on A1 temus editions and classicist Judy 
Hallett, who translated five stanzas of “The Mad Gar¬ 
dener’s Song” into Latin. August Imholtz continued 
his tradition of providing most of the meeting reports 
during these years. 

A notice appeared in #82: “The Editors of the 
Knight Letter are pleased to announce that, beginning 
with this issue, all URLs (links) in ‘Far-Flung,’ which 
up to now have been printed, are now online and 
clickable!” They were originally in a separate list on a 
website ( un¬ 
til #87, when they became 
available through our blog 
(Sarah’s idea). 

I again took over the 
reins, briefly, in #83 whilst 
Sarah Adams-Kiddy was 
ramping up. It is an issue I 
am particularly pleased with, 
as it introduced the first 
known portrait of Carroll’s 
beloved mother, Fanny, and 
a companion portrait, also 
hitherto unknown, of his 
Aunt Lucy. 

Sarah edited #84 and 
85, signing with a Rackham 
rendering of the Cheshire 
Cat’s smile. In #84, members 
commented and opined (oh 
boy, did they opine!) on var¬ 
ious aspects of the recently 
released Tim Burton movie. 
In #85, we had our first col¬ 
or pages, necessitated by the 
article “Am I Blue?” about 
the color of Alice’s dress. 

The wonderfully talented illustrator Mahendra 
Singh then took over #86, Sarah having her hands 
full with twin babies. Although it was tough going for 
him (his wife intensely dislikes Carroll, so we had to 
correspond under the auspices of a faux “Oscar Wilde 
Society”), he did a splendid job, even if he says his era 
should be dubbed “The Age of Chaos.” His signature 
was a dormouse falling into a teapot. 

In #86 we announced that through the kindness 
of The Internet Archive, all Knight Letters past, pres- 


ent, and future were being digitized and are avail¬ 
able online ( We 
update this annually with two issues; only member/ 
subscribers have the latest one. Number 88 again had 
a color section, celebrating the 150 th anniversary of a 
certain boat trip up the Isis. An article on the “Guin¬ 
ness Alice” and a cartoon by Roger Langridge were 
also in color, in #91. 

Number 92 began a new recurring column, then 
called “Forgotten Illustrators,” now “Arcane Illustra¬ 
tors.” Number 95 celebrated Alice 150 (and had its 
own “signature,” created by Adriana Peliano, reflect¬ 
ing the collaboration between Mahendra and myself 
on editorial duties for that issue). 

The ever-delightful Chris Morgan, erstwhile edi¬ 
tor of BYTE magazine, then took over editorial duties 
in #96 (his signature is Humpty falling off a wall), a 
position he “rejoices in” to this day. (One hopes.) 

Certainly the Knight Letter would be nothing 
without its writers, contributors, reviewers, designers, 
and illustrators, who are duly acknowledged and pro¬ 
foundly thanked—right here! For the record, a list of 
our editors-in-chief, all of whom served our member¬ 
ship superbly: 

♦ Stan Marx, #s 1 (August , 1974)- 7 (June 1977); 27 
(October 1987) - 35 (Fall 1990) 

♦ Peter Heath, 8 (November 1977) - 13 (November 

♦ David Schaefer, 14 (August 1980) - 17 (July 1982) 

♦ Sandor Burstein, 18 (February 1983) - 21 (Spring 

♦ August Imholtz, 22 (February 1985) - 26 (February 

♦ Charlie Lovett, 36 (Winter 1991) - 48 (Autumn 

♦ Mark Burstein, 49 (Spring 1995) - 77 (Fall 2006); 
83 (Winter2009) 

♦ Andrew Sellon, 78 (Summer 2007) -82 (Summer 


♦ Sarah Adams-Kiddy, 84 (Spring 2010) - 85 (Winter 

2010 ) 

♦ Mahendra Singh, 86 (Summer 2011) - 95 (Fall 

♦ Chris Morgan, 96 (Spring 2016) - 

To help our history continue, would YOU kindly con¬ 
sider writing an article, a review, or a short item such 
as is found in “Far-Flung”? If you discover something 
we may not know about, tell us! And if you have expe¬ 
rience, or would like to try your hand, in anything re¬ 
lated to magazine production, feel free to contact us. 

Over the last 44 years, we have evolved into a 
substantive, professionally printed magazine with a 
steady circulation of at least 300 members, including 
those from ten countries outside the U.S. Here’s to 
the next 100 issues, in celebration of which we have 
designated this one Volume III, Issue 1. 

“There’s glory for you. ” 

\ Have a FEW 


oNE CHLL makes me 



t**rr oo anything 


Dove WkcxiwoKcA., "Reality Check/ August £016 


Carroll’s Publishing History 
with Macmillan: A Research Narrative 


B y 2001,1 was making near-yearly trips to Lon¬ 
don, and I decided to visit the Macmillan 
Company’s publishing archives at the Brit¬ 
ish Library (BL) to see what I could learn about Lewis 
Carroll’s relationship with Macmillan, his publisher. I 
had read about the archives in Morton Cohen’s excel¬ 
lent Lewis Carroll and the House of Macmillan, but as far 
as I knew, few Carroll researchers other than Morton 
had used these archives. 

I sent an email to Elizabeth James, who at the 
time was Head of British Collections at the BL, and 
who had herself published widely on the Macmillan 
Company. She kindly gave me the manuscript (MS) 
numbers for the Macmillan correspondence I need¬ 
ed. At the time, Byron Sewell and I were preparing a 
bibliography of Carroll’s Sylvie and Bruno books, so I 
was particularly interested in correspondence about 
that novel. Elizabeth had the specific volumes called 
and ready the day I came to the Library. 

Since then, I have spent many hours in the manu¬ 
script reading room of the BL, poring over the Mac¬ 
millan Letterbooks—large heavy volumes that contain 
copies of the outgoing correspondence of the Macmil¬ 
lan Company with Lewis Carroll and others. Examin¬ 
ing these books is an unfailingly illuminating and fas¬ 
cinating experience, but it is not without challenges. 

There are several series of Letterbooks in the Ar¬ 
chives (e.g., some contain letters to family members, 
and others contain letters to other publishers), but 
I consulted the general correspondence series: more 
than 500 books containing the Macmillan Company’s 
letters to its major authors, dating from 1854 to 1940. 
Each book measures about 12 by 16 inches, is about 
4 inches thick, and weighs just shy of a ton (or so it 
seems). They are cumbersome to work with physi¬ 
cally, and also can be difficult from a research stand¬ 
point. For each manuscript number, there are two or 
three Parts, that is, two or three Letterbooks, usually 
three, with 500 or more letters in each book. At the 
beginning of Part 1, there is an index, arranged by ad¬ 
dressee. If perchance you fail to order Part 1 because 
you are only interested in letters in Parts 2 or 3, or 
you are up against the BL’s daily limit of ten requests, 
you are in trouble, because you won’t have an index. 
Voice of experience. 

Beginning then in 2001, every time I went to Lon¬ 
don I would go to the BL and examine additional Let¬ 
terbooks. Not only have I found extensive informa¬ 
tion on the publishing specifics of Alice’s Adventures 
in Wonderland, Sylvie and Bruno, and Carroll’s other 
books, but I have gained significant insight into the 
relationship between Carroll and his publisher, Alex¬ 
ander Macmillan. The Letterbooks tell us a great deal 
about the personalities of Lewis Carroll and Alexan¬ 
der Macmillan, and about the relationship between 
the Macmillan Company and Carroll, particularly in 
comparison with Macmillan’s other authors. 

Carroll has a well-deserved reputation for being 
difficult (usually expressed as “fussy” or “finicky”). 
Even before the first Alice book went to press, despite 
his youth and fledgling status as a children’s author, 
he did not hesitate to push his publishing views for¬ 
ward—though not in an objectionable manner. Car- 
roll was in control of his publications with Macmillan 
from the very beginning. He bore all the costs of pub¬ 
lishing and promoting his books, and it was Carroll 
who made the final decisions as to the books’ design, 
quality, print runs, advertising, and so on. Nonethe¬ 
less, even though Carroll was responsible financially, 
Alexander Macmillan, the head of the firm, never hes¬ 
itated when he felt it necessary to push back against 
his author’s sometimes impractical ideas. Most impor¬ 
tantly, Alexander always gave Carroll excellent advice. 
Alexander Macmillan personally strongly influenced 
the publishing specifics of Alice and Carroll’s other 
works. The extent of his influence can be fully appre¬ 
ciated only by reading the Letterbooks. 

Alexander had a wonderful, lively way of express¬ 
ing himself, and his letters to Carroll are written with 
verve and brio. You see in their correspondence a 
ceaseless back-and-forth between Carroll and Alex¬ 
ander (and the latter’s colleagues and successors). If 
Macmillan wanted to do x, Carroll would prefer y or 
z; the two were never quite in sync. Sometimes one 
man would prevail and sometimes the other. You get 
a much fuller sense of this from the Letterbooks than 
can be obtained from reading Morton Cohen’s book, 
which contains Carroll’s letters to Macmillan, but only 
a few brief excerpts from the Macmillan side of the 


Carroll could be grumpy and demanding, and 
Macmillan occasionally (though rarely) would re¬ 
spond sharply. When Carroll complained about the 
paper chosen for the German translation of Alice’s Ad¬ 
ventures in Wonderland , Alexander Macmillan wrote, 
“We have no possible motive for saving you money 
against your will, and assuredly did not intentionally 
use one paper, knowing you wanted another. I know 
you wanted a good paper as like the English as pos¬ 
sible. This we took pains to procure.” 

Carroll sometimes had unrealistic ideas. In 1869 
he wanted Macmillan to publish two variant editions 
of his poetry book, Phantasmagoria —one to include 
special Oxford poems and be sold only in Oxford, 
and at a higher price. Macmillan told him forthright¬ 
ly: “There is no end of the perversity your proposed 
scheme will cause.” In this instance, Macmillan won. 
Twenty years later, Carroll won when he insisted on 
publishing the unpopular Sylvie and Bruno books in 
initial runs of 20,000 copies each. There were still 
copies of the second book in Macmillan’s warehouse 
as late as the 1930s. 

Except with Sylvie and Bruno, Carroll was always 
cautious. Carroll obsessed over the size of print runs, 
and he was extremely critical of any printing and 
binding anomalies he perceived. He knew what he 
wanted, and he was a perfectionist. Macmillan spent 
a lot of ink reassuring Carroll about his many con¬ 
cerns. Although the House of Macmillan may have 
expressed annoyance with Carroll once or twice, in 
general they were patient, respectful, polite, and will¬ 
ing to bend over backwards to mollify Carroll, no mat¬ 
ter how much grief he gave them. They fulfilled un¬ 
ending requests for favors without complaint. 

Studying the Letterbooks, one can compare Mac¬ 
millan’s correspondence with Carroll with the letters 
written to other authors. And this is revelatory. Except 
in the early years, where they begin “Dear Sir,” let¬ 
ters to Carroll invariably begin “Dear Mr. Dodgson.” 
Letters to other authors often begin more familiarly: 
Dear Lang, Dear Frazer, Dear Pater, My dear Tenny¬ 
son. Dodgson is never without the “Mr.” And letters 
from members of the Macmillan family to other au¬ 
thors are often signed with just their first names— 
Alex, Maurice, George, Frederick—but not their let¬ 
ters to Carroll. (Letters from the Macmillan Company 
were generally signed by Alexander in the early days, 
and later often by a younger family member, or his 
partner George Lillie Craik. For a time, most were 
signed simply “Macmillan 8c Co.”) 

It appears clear that this stiffness originated on 
Carroll’s side. It is curious how formal Carroll always 
was, although he was on friendly terms with Alexan¬ 
der Macmillan and evidently visited his family. It has 
been suggested that Carroll looked down on the Mac¬ 
millans because they were in trade. He certainly used 

the Company as errand boys. He had them buy him 
theatre tickets endlessly, and order him books on oc¬ 
casion. He wanted them to hire one of his cousins 
(William Melville Wilcox, Carroll’s godson and first 
cousin once removed). He frequently asked Macmil¬ 
lan to read and publish books written by friends; most 
were rejected, though a few were published at Car- 
roll’s expense and only to please him. For example, 
referring to Bumblebee Bogo’s Budget by Carroll’s friend 
William Webb Follett Synge, Macmillan 8c Co. wrote: 
“We think very little of the verses and as we told you 
when we agreed to publish them we should not have 
undertaken to bring them out except to oblige you.” 
(October 12, 1887). 

Much of this insight into the relationship be¬ 
tween author and publisher would be missed if you 
were reading only the letters to Carroll, and not some 
of the letters to other authors in the same Letterbook. 
This is the great advantage of reading the actual Let¬ 
terbooks rather than just the excerpts that are avail¬ 
able at two U.S. research institutions. 

Yes! After traveling to London for years and years 
to read this correspondence, it was a shock to discov¬ 
er that much of it is available right here in the United 
States. The Rosenbach Museum and Library in Phila¬ 
delphia holds a microfilm of the letters from Macmil¬ 
lan to Carroll, along with a transcript of these letters, 
as well as virtually all known letters from Carroll to 
Macmillan. (The letters from Carroll were sold by the 
Macmillan Company to the Rosenbach in 1957, and 
the microfilm was provided to the Rosenbach as part 
of that sale.) 

The Macmillan letters to Carroll are also available 
at New York University’s Fales Library. Morton Cohen 
told me that he was denied access to the Macmillan 
Archives for unknown reasons when he was preparing 
the above-mentioned volume, so he had to rely on 
the Rosenbach holdings. He had copies of the letters 
made from the Rosenbach microfilm, and these cop¬ 
ies are now at the Fales. 


Before addressing that question, a word of explana¬ 
tion as to how the Letterbooks were created may be 
helpful. The Letterbooks were made up of sheets of 
a sort of tissue-paper (each with a heavier backing to 
give them solidity) bound together—up to 500 sheets 
per book. A sheet of the paper would be dampened, 
and then placed in contact with a newly written, but 
dry, original letter. The whole book was then closed 
and placed in a press for 30 to 60 seconds: voila, an 
impression of the letter would be left on the damp 
tissue-paper.The major problem in reading the letters 
today is illegibility. The quality of the copies has ap¬ 
parently deteriorated over the decades, and many let- 


t"X- A /Wvf 

/>•/. «. '**^1 

■£ 7—.'-/4 -**&♦ i r -r* $** 

**'**' 7 £C jfc -Vi* 

,“ 2 ™ £,A,_* ^ '*«■' * 

^ *<r *« <* 

^4-* /-/ 

/*-*#*'? . 

tf. a 

f ■ . ^ ^-r^.'^i'r ** *■??"**'*’ 

/** ** , . “ >*h^- py**»s 

iu^s^frr'* , x- < ^rZT-^**C'7 

a 't/r'£.: ., t-^-' ~<'. ,m ’"-' 

Figure 1. 

/?*• •lt<44, .* /frtff 


2?cv‘ /* 

• ( V<w » VO*. 4 

Figure 2. 

ters are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to read. 
Those dating from the crucial early years of Alice pub¬ 
lication are unfortunately among the worst. Strangely, 
it seems that the copies in Fales and the Rosenbach 
are sometimes more legible than the copies in the Let- 
terbooks at the BL, even though the former are cop¬ 
ies of copies. Plato’s cave in reverse. If we consider the 
Letterbooks the originals, or at least as close as we can 
get to the originals, then sometimes the copies may 
be superior. 

For example, in the Letterbooks covering Octo¬ 
ber 27, 1865, through April 25, 1866 (MS 55385), I 
found all the letters to Carroll illegible. The last 200- 
plus pages are totally blank. This problem continues 
in the next book, MS 55386 Part 1, where many letters 
are so faint one can see almost nothing. 

Figure 1 is a letter from MS 55386, dated April 
30, 1866, which the Rosenbach transcriber was able to 
read much more of than I, giving support to my theo¬ 
ry that sometimes the copies at the Rosenbach might 
be more legible than the BL copies. (The illustrations 
in this article are third-generation images—from the 
Rosenbach microfilm by way of the Fales Library. But 
they will give you an idea.) 

Here is the Rosenbach transcription: 

My dear Sir, 

I shall have a little handbill such as you 
wish drawn up and you shall see a proof. I 
think it should not be too large, or the ex¬ 
tracts too long. It is more effective to have 
short telling ones. If you don’t mind the 
trouble it might be better that you make the 

extracts yourself. I will wait till you tell me if 
you will do it. 

Yours very truly, 

A. Macmillan 

If we go on advertising always, we shall 
spend an awful amount of money. Each 
copy of your book that is sold is an adver¬ 
tisement, and I doubt whether people buy 
at all in proportion to the amount spent. 

The book won’t drop out of sight. 

At the BL, I could read most of the postscript, but 
not the words above the signature. In Figure 1, an im¬ 
age from the Rosenbach microfilm, most of the words 
above the signature seem legible. 

The illegibility at the BL is generally due to fad¬ 
ing of the ink, but there are also cases in which the 
wet copying process apparently has caused the ink 
to spread, making it difficult to read. On one occa¬ 
sion, I tried to look at the letters from the back, using 
a mirror, because the image seemed a little sharper 
that way, since one could better see the line originally 
made by the nib of the pen. 

And of course there are handwriting issues. Let¬ 
ters from Alexander Macmillan’s partner George Lil¬ 
lie Craik in particular can often be difficult to read. 
Figure 2 is an example of Craik’s handwriting from 
1888. This particular example isn’t the most egre¬ 
gious that I have encountered, but it indicates the 
basic problem. (Note, by the way, the numbers at the 
top: 605 is the number of the previous letter to Car- 
roll, 977 is the next letter in this book to Carroll—a 


Figure 3 . 

helpful internal indexing system, which is unfortunate¬ 
ly not present in the early volumes of the Letterbooks.) 

Figure 3 is an example of illegibility in a letter 
from Alexander Macmillan. On December 17, 1871, 
with the first thousands of Through the Looking-Glass 
coming off the presses, Carroll had written to say that 
Tenniel complained of “inequality” in the printing of 
the illustrations. Macmillan replied, “I have got the 
paper made with less size for those new copies, and 
I think this will obviate a good deal of the [illegible] 
which Mr. Tenniel complained of. ...” (“Size” refers 
to any of several substances that can be used in paper¬ 
making to control the absorbency.) 

I have been struggling with this illegible word. I 
thought for a while it was “woolliness,” but I was not 
satisfied with this reading, even though I think Alex¬ 
ander Macmillan may have used the word in at least 
one other letter to Carroll. 

Figure 4 is a closer look at the illegible word. I 
now believe the word must be “rottenness,” although 
this is not a word we would use today. At the BL, I 
compared the initial letter to other words in the let¬ 
ters written by Alexander Macmillan, and “r” was the 
only match. Macmillan’s initial s, c, w, and v were all 
different. Moreover, what looks like a dot over an “i” is 
actually a speck on the paper. The word “rottenness” 
was apparently used in the nineteenth century to re¬ 
fer to a lack of sharpness in a line of an engraving. 
See, for example, Wood engraving: a manual of instruc¬ 
tion by William James Linton (London: George Bell 
and Sons, 1884), p. 68: “Avoid broken black lines, un¬ 
less purposely broken; rottenness of line, when part 


- •*'*£*—^ iA 

A &&& 


Figure 5 . 

of the surface of a line is cut away, or when the line is 
undercut, so that it breaks down; shallowness of cut¬ 
ting. ...” (Figure 4 also shows slightly the spreading 
of the ink that I mentioned.) 

If the copies that are available at the Rosenbach 
and the Fales are in fact more legible than the BL cop¬ 
ies, the likely explanation would be that the BL copies 
are undergoing a continuous process of deterioration 
and are no longer as easy to read as they would have 
been 50 years ago. Macmillan scholar Elizabeth James 
and Macmillan archivist Alysoun Sanders concur. 

Another challenge: I have noted some indexing 
failures in the Letterbooks, though not a large num¬ 
ber. A few letters to Carroll are missing from the in¬ 
dex. There are also numerous letters to others that 
mention Carroll, but these are not indexed under 
Carroll (i.e., Dodgson). 

Another problem is lacunae. As Cohen has com¬ 
mented, there are “cavernous gaps” in the correspon¬ 
dence on both sides. For example, there are no ex- 


tant letters from Carroll to Macmillan from May 1871 
to December 17, 1871, and this was a crucial time, 
when Through the Looking-Glass was going to press. 
Also, we sometimes have responses from Carroll to 
questions from Macmillan that can’t be found in the 


I haven’t seen the microfilm of the letters at the 
Rosenbach, but I have seen the transcript the Rosen- 
bach made many years ago. I’ve concluded that, al¬ 
though the Rosenbach transcriber had many difficul¬ 
ties, just as I did, he or she was able to decipher many 
more words than I could, supporting my theory of 
deterioration of the BL copies of the letters. 

On the other hand, the Rosenbach transcription 
does have many errors—places where I feel sure my 
reading is more correct. 

Figure 5 is a letter from Craik from 1876. For 
the second paragraph, Rosenbach’s transcript reads, 
“They could play ball and offer them to anyone else 

here, but there is nothing to prohibit the publication 
in Holland where they are printed.” 

One realizes immediately (right off the bat, you 
might say) how unlikely it is that Craik would have 
used the phrase “play ball,” and a glance at the Ox¬ 
ford English Dictionary confirms that the first citation 
of “play ball” in the figurative sense of “to cooperate” 
was in 1903. A better reading might be “They could 
not, they will not, offer them. . . .” 

I hope the above examples convey some idea of 
both the pleasures and the difficulty of working with 
these “primary” or nearly primary sources. 

This paper originated as a talk at The House of Macmil¬ 
lan: An International Publisher’s Archive Symposium, June 
24, 2016, at the University of Reading, UK. I am grateful 
to Rosenbach Librarian Elizabeth Fuller, Professor Michael 
Hancher, Dr. Elizabeth James, Macmillan archivist Aly- 
soun Sanders, Carroll collector Alan Tannenbaum, and the 
late Professor Morton Cohen for their generous assistance. 


...of the mushroom” 


D uring the fabled Sixties, Carroll’s delightful 
Alice tales were adopted and absorbed by 
the hippie culture, perhaps in part as the 
result of televised and university showings of the 1951 
Disney cartoon, the latter specifically for the amuse¬ 
ment of “heads” (drug enthusiasts) - 1 As I put it in the 
introduction to the “Underground” edition of Alice’s 
Adventures Under Ground , 2 “Alice and the 1960s were 
a natural mix—the radical world-view they shared, 
the identifications with the bizarre, surreal, the anti¬ 
authoritarian—and both enjoyed a fine sense of hu¬ 
mor. Alice and her friends, particularly the hookah¬ 
smoking caterpillar, became popular icons in this 
decade, spawning posters, belt-buckles, blotter paper 
‘acid,’ books (Thomas Fensch’s fallacious Alice in Ac- 
idland) , 3 and rock songs (“White Rabbit”) by people 
who clearly never read the book.” But by and large 
Alice’s popularity in the ’60s was due to how snugly 
the works fit into the psychedelic drug experience on 
a multitude of levels. 4 

A fairly recent example of the pervasiveness of 
the identification of the caterpillar’s mushroom with 
psychedelia is this photograph (Figure 1) of Psilocybe 
cubensis, aka “magic mushrooms,” growing out of Al¬ 
ice’s Adventures , the creation of photomicrographer/ 
neurobiologist Dr. Igor Siwanowicz, another of whose 
images grace this issue’s cover. 5 

The first problem with Alice’s absorption into the 
counterculture was that many drugged-out or simply 
delusional hippies figured that, if the book was so “ac¬ 
curate,” Carroll himself must have been a “head” of 
his time, citing not just internal references (a hoo¬ 
kah, mushrooms, grass), but the free availability of 
opioid and other drugs in Carroll’s time. Thomas 
Fensch’s Alice in Acidland (1970) 6 is perhaps the worst 
offender, positing Carroll’s “acid” (LSD) use eighty 
years before its discovery. Fortunately, clear readings 
of Carroll’s now available diaries and letters do not 
picture a man who had any experience with intoxicants, 
other than perhaps the occasional second glass of sher¬ 
ry. There is record of his taking opium once, for a tooth¬ 
ache. (It could be said that Carroll did have knowledge 
of certain non-psychoactive drugs because he practiced 
homeopathic medicine, both poisonous and herbal.) 

The second part of this canard was the misiden- 
tification of the Caterpillar’s mushroom as Amanita 
muscaria, fly agaric (Figure 2), a psychoactive entheo- 
gen whose ubiquity in illustrated fairy-tales and kitschy 

Figure 2. 


Figure 3 . 

Figure 4. 

kitchen and nursery decor is probably based on its 
appealing appearance (a bright red cap covered with 
numerous small white pyramid-shaped warts). One of 
its characteristic hallucinations is seeming changes in 
size, not to mention distortions of space and time. It 
was said that even if Carroll didn’t ingest them him¬ 
self, he could at least have read about them, most 
likely in Mordecai Cubitt Cooke’s The Seven Sisters of 
Sleep: A Popular History of the Seven Prevailing Narcotics 
of the World (I860).' 7 

In a jaw-droppingly ill-mannered, inadequately 
researched, insanely counterfactual, and maliciously 
accusatory paper titled “Wonderland Revisited” (one 
can’t help recalling Twain’s remark in Life on the Mis¬ 
sissippi , “One gets such wholesale returns of conjec¬ 
ture out of such a trifling investment of fact”) pub¬ 
lished in Psychedelia Britannica: Hallucinogenic Drugs in 
Britain , 8 one Michael Carmichael asserts that, “a few 
days before writing Alice , Carroll made his only ever 
visit to the Bodleian library, 9 where a copy of Morde¬ 
cai Cooke’s recently-published drug survey The Seven 
Sisters of Sleep had been deposited. The Bodleian copy 
of this book still has most of its pages uncut, 10 with 
the notable exception of the contents page and the 
chapter on the fly agaric, entitled ‘The Exile of Sibe¬ 
ria.’ Carroll was particularly interested in all things 
Russian: in fact, Russia was the only country he ever 
visited outside Britain. 11 Dodgson would have been 
immediately attracted to Cooke’s Seven Sisters of Sleep 
for two more obvious reasons: he had seven sisters and 
he was a lifelong insomniac.” Now that’s logic for you! 

Books such as Andy Letcher’s Shroom: A Cultural 
History of the Magic Mushroom 12 seem to accept musca¬ 
rine intoxication as a given; it has made its way into 

Wikipedia as a fact with this citation. One problem: As 
depicted by Tenniel (and seen in color in The Nursery 
Alice), the mushroom was smooth-capped and gray, 
and could not possibly be A. muscaria. While it is un¬ 
doubtedly true that A. muscaria (alone among the 
mushroom family) characteristically produces delu¬ 
sions of changes in size, Carroll’s imagination, rather 
than his scholarly research, was what caused Alice to 
grow and shrink, whether from mushrooms, a slice of 
cake, or a bottle of drink me . 13 

Many modern illustrators have chosen to use 
the colorful fly agaric, A. muscaria, including Greg 
Hildebrandt (2004), Leonor Solans (2009), Trevor 
Brown (2010), Camille Rose Garcia (2010), Benjamin 
Lacombe (2015), and Anna Bond (2015); there are 
fly agarics in the scene in the Tim Burton movie and 
uncountable online images, posters, fan art, and the 
like. I have not gone through every book I own to 
check, but the earliest use I have found is in Gwyn¬ 
edd Hudson’s illustration (1922), where although the 
Caterpillar was sitting on a different one, there were 
fly agarics nearby. 

Let us here also note that A. muscaria is poisonous, 
and its ingestion must be handled with great care. 14 

There is no Carrollian correspondence or diary 
entry on this topic, so the subject of this inquiry would 
be better stated as: Where did John Tenniel get the 
image (Figure 3)? A book on mushrooms? Nature? 
His own imagination? How much was based on Car- 
roll’s own illustration for his Under Ground manuscript 
(Figure 4) ? 

A note in More Annotated Alice (1990) addresses 
the topic, specifically citing “A Garden Tour of Won¬ 
derland” by Robert Hornback, 15 who declared it 


Figure 5 . 

could not be A. muscaria and thought it might be the 
nonintoxicating Amanita fulva instead. OK, we know 
for a fact that it’s not a depiction of A. muscaria , but 
what exactly is it? 

I wrote to Barbara Ching, executive secretary of 
the North American Mycological Association (NAMA), 
asking for recommendations of experts to talk to. She 
got me in touch with Michael Beug, PhD, professor 
emeritus at The Evergreen State College (Olympia, 
Washington), toxicology chair for NAMA, author of 
Ascomycete Fungi of North America: A Mushroom Reference 
Guide , 16 and a particular expert in psychedelic mush¬ 
rooms; the renowned Roy Watling, MBE, PhD, head 
of Mycology and Plant Pathology at the Royal Botanic 
Garden Edinburgh, author of more than a dozen 
books on mycology identification, including Fungi} 1 
and Tropical Mycology ; 18 and Nicholas P. Money, PhD, 
professor of botany at Miami University (Oxford, 
Ohio), and author of Mushroom , 19 Mr. Bloomfield’s Or¬ 
chard: The Mysterious World of Mushrooms, Molds, and 
Mycologists, 20 and Mushrooms: A Natural and Cultural 
History 21 All of these distinguished gentlemen were 
kind enough to take time to reply. 

Beug stated: 

The mushroom looks very generic to me. There 
are a huge number of possibilities. The illustra¬ 
tion is clearly not Amanita muscaria. A leap of 
imagination could point to an Amanita in the 
vaginata group (which would include Amanita 
fulva) , but too many differences exist for me 
to like that idea. Why is the volva not shown? 

Why is the cap not drawn as striate? Why are 
there no volva remains on the cap? Where are 
the trees that A. fulva must be associated with? 

The illustration is closer to a generic Tri- 
choloma or Melanoleuca or Clitocybe or a massive 
number of other genera. Since it is in grass, 
and given the size relative to the grass blades, 
a good guess would be Marasmius oreades, the 
Fairy Ring Mushroom (Figure 5), which is 

famous for growing in circles in grass. The 
morphology is entirely consistent with M. oreades. 
There is a lot of mythology surrounding M. 
oreades and fairies and so there is a plausible 
reason to propose us[ing] this mushroom to 
illustrate this story. It is also a tasty edible. 

Watling said: 

I know the figure well and have not thought 
much more about it, as I considered the discus¬ 
sions about Amanita ludicrous. The illustra¬ 
tion is exceedingly good really and depicts two 
fungi, the one the Caterpillar is seated on, and 
the more interesting fungi below. The latter by 
their shape and colouring are surely a species of 
Panaeolus, of which at least one species from my 
own experience with poison cases in Scotland is 
hallucinogenic, 22 viz. P. subbalteatus now called P. 
cinctulus. The larger “seat” is expanded, which 
the Panaeolus would not do. If the sizes are 
right—and there is no reason to suppose they 
are not—the fungus is something like the Cloud 
Mushroom, Clitocybe nebularis, which forms very 
obvious fairy rings in woodlands. ( Marasmius 
oreades, the usual “fairy ring” mushroom, is not 
found in woodlands.) Some of these species 
are toxic, although nebularis is not—although I 
would not try it! I think the fungus hiding in the 
grass below the Caterpillar is the significant one. 

Money wrote: 

In our time, when a premium is placed upon 
molecular identification of mushrooms, the 
best field mycologists refer to subconscious 
skills in recognition that draw on the immediate 
appearance of the fungus as well as its loca¬ 
tion, the surrounding vegetation, and time of 
year. The smell of the fruit body, its texture, 
and structural details revealed with a hand lens 
play a secondary role in the recognition pro¬ 
cess. The subliminal response is also useful for 
identifying mushrooms from illustrations, with 
the caveat that the verdict is always dependent 
on the proficiency and intent of the artist. 

Following the logic of this preamble, 

John Tenniel’s mushrooms look like the fruit 
bodies of the fairy ring mushroom, Marasmius 
oreades. The fairy ring mushroom is common 
in Europe and would have been familiar to 
anyone who walked in the meadows around 
southern England. This fungus is quite vari¬ 
able in appearance, but the illustration in 
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland typifies this 
species, with its broad, smooth-surfaced cap 
that begins as a bell and flattens at maturity. 


The absence of a ring on the stem and cup, 
or volva, at the base is also significant and ex¬ 
cludes many species from consideration. The 
importance of fairy rings in European folk¬ 
lore may have been another feature of this 
mushroom that attracted the artist. 23 What 
better seat for a philosophical caterpillar? 

There is one more characteristic of the fairy 
ring mushroom that may have influenced its 
use in Carroll’s book, but this is very speculative. 
Is it possible that the author, or the publishers, 
were concerned that a reader would take bites 
from a wild mushroom, as Alice did? If so, they 
would have made certain to avoid illustrating 
anything with a ring on its stem, like a toxic 
species of Amanita. And Marasmius oreades is the 
perfect alternative to a poisonous mushroom, 
because it is an edible species with a sweet taste. 

Another well-known Carrollian mushroom (Figure 6) 
was one of the “fairy-fancies” illustrated by his friend 
E. Gertrude Thomson for his Three Sunsets and Other 
Poems , 24 which more resembles Amanita muscaria, but 
that’s a whole other story. 

Granted, it’s not likely that the mushroom will 
ever be positively identified, although it now looks 
like the fairy ring may be the best candidate. Car- 
roll’s niece F. Menella Dodgson recalled, “One walk, 
when I was about eight, stands out clearly. He took 
me Newlands Corner way, and when we came to the 
‘fairy rings’ among the may trees there, he asked me 
‘Do you believe in fairies?”’ 25 So at least we know he 
was aware of this kind of mushroom. 

As to the mushroom’s identity, even experts have 
their doubts and speculations. But we definitively know 
what it’s not, and that’s a good start. 


1 ‘“Come, my head’s free at last!’ said Alice in a tone of 
delight.” - Chapter V 

2 WordPlay, 2000 

3 Barnes, 1970 

4 Jenifer Ransom’s fine article “An Archetype of 
Transformation” ( KL 76:30) discusses the psychedelic 
aspects in greater detail. 

5 Dr. Siwanowicz is currently at the Howard Hughes 
Medical Institute’s Janelia Farm Research Campus in 
Virginia. Examples of his astonishingly colorful and 
truly brilliant photographs of insects and other creatures 
of the micro world can be found in the children’s 
book Animals Up Close (DK Publishing, 2009) and on 
the Web at If you don’t 
happen to recognize that edition of Alice, it’s because, 

as Dr. Siwanowicz told me in email correspondence, it’s 
actually a Bible growing the mushrooms, onto which he 
Photoshopped the cover of Wonderland “to make it less 
controversial and put a different spin on it.” 

6 “Differentiating once, we get LSD, a function of great 
value” - Carroll’s “The Dynamics of a Parti-cle” (1865). 
Despite its appearance, this is, of course, a reference to 
pounds, £s; shillings, S; and pence, D. 

7 The “seven sisters” were opium, coca, cannabis, 
belladonna, datura, digitalis, and A. muscaria. 

8 Antonio Melechi, ed., Turnaround Books, 1997. In 
the essay, Dodgson is accused of pedophilia, rampant 
drug abuse, and giving powerful pyschoactive drugs to 
children. The entire essay could easily fit in the “Sic, Sic, 
Sic” section of this magazine. 

9 Another fine example of Mr. Carmichaels’ alternative 
facts; Dodgson was a frequent visitor to the Bodlean, and 
there is no particular evidence he ever saw this book. 

10 He means unopened, not uncut. 

11 Not to mention France, Germany, and Prussia on his way there. 

12 Faber and Faber, 2006 

13 And if it were necessary to identify the type of mushroom, 
would it not also be necessary to identify the type of cake, 
not to mention the contents of the drink me bottle, that 
caused her size dysphoria? 

14 To counteract toxicity, consumers in cultures such as are 
found in Siberia drink a shaman’s urine, after he or she 
ingested the mushroom. 

15 Pacific Horticulture, Fall 1983 

16 University of Texas Press, 2014 

17 Smithsonian, 2003 

18 CABI, 2002 

19 Oxford University Press, 2011 

20 Oxford University Press, 2002 

21 Reaktion Books, 2017 

22 Dr. Wading notes that his cases with P. cinctulus were due 
to an accidental misidentification by their ingestors, not 
someone trying to get high. 

23 Mushrooms: A Natural and Cultural History, pp. 15-21 

24 Macmillan, 1898 

25 Introduction to The Diaries of Lewis Carroll, Roger 
Lancelyn Green, ed., Oxford University Press, 1954. 
Edward Wakeling points out that Nella doesn’t appear 
in the diaries until August of 1887, when she would have 
been eleven, not eight. 




tenniel’s post-publication drawings and tracings in the berg collection: PART I 



I enclose a puzzle for you to guess. It is a word in your letter which / can’t read, 
but have carefully traced it, putting the paper up against the window. 

—Lewis Carroll to Mary Brown, May 19, 1887 

“begin at the beginning” 

T r he Berg Collection in The New York Pub¬ 
lic Library holds many rare pieces of art by 
John Tenniel—sketches, finished drawings, 
and tracings—along with proofs and several quotable 
letters. Most of the art is either collected into specially 
bound books or tipped into editions of the intended 
book opposite the corresponding print, but some 
pieces are still loose, housed individually or collec¬ 
tively inside folders or booklike cases. The collection 
holds, for example, twenty-three original drawings 
and nineteen tracings created between 1859 and 1864 
for Once a Week, a publication created to rival another 
by Charles Dickens. The artwork, collected with the 
corresponding engraved illustrations, was handsome¬ 
ly bound by Riviere & Son, a celebrated bookbind¬ 
ing firm. The collection also holds a brown morocco 
scrapbook Tenniel kept of his engravings. The first 
third of the 175 collected have “legends” (captions) 
in his own hand, with the rest sadly blank. But praised 
amongst the Berg’s treasures—and the main thrust 
of this article—are the twenty-four post-publication 
drawings and eighteen tracings Tenniel created from 
his illustrations for Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures 
in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass. In truth, 
only one of these post-publication drawings is from 

As the name implies, post-publication drawings 
are drawings Tenniel created after the books were 
published and therefore were not used in the cre¬ 
ation of the illustrations. They are found in such in¬ 
stitutions as Harvard University, the Morgan Library, 
and New York University, as well as in several private 
collections. Of the sixty-five or so 1 drawings currently 
known, the Berol seems to hold the earliest: the im¬ 
age of Alice watching the White Rabbit scurry away, 
framed as a scroll hanging on a nail, complete with 
holly leaves and the adorned date “1865.” It appears 
on the verso of the frontispiece in an edition of Won¬ 
derland with a dedication to “Miss Marian Pritchett / 

With Mr. Tenniel’s love. / Christmas. 1865.” 2 After 
the Berg collection, Harvard has the most, with ten 
for Wonderland (all non-reverse images—i.e., not mir¬ 
ror images of the printed illustrations) and three for 
Looking-Glass (two in reverse). All these drawings are 
sometimes referred to as finished drawings or commis¬ 
sion drawings. “Finished ’ not because they are com¬ 
pleted but because they have fine draftsmanship and 
commission because they are or were thought to have 
been created for collectors. 

The Berg also holds two other Alice-related 
items. They are first editions of the Alice books but 
with tipped-in proof sheets (i.e., test pages printed 
before the final printing of the books) opposite each 
illustration, signed with “J. Tenniel” and “Dalziel,” the 
engraver. The books are both bound in green mo¬ 
rocco as a set, complete with a hubbed spine, gold 
printing, and decorative floral work. The uniformity 
of the paper and the signatures (Tenniel left, Dalziel 
right) suggests that the proofs were actually struck 
about 1898 to 1905 when other such books were cre¬ 
ated with Tenniel’s Alice artwork. In fact, the books 
may have been created in response to Carroll’s own 
proof books being burned in a fire at Riviere, the 

Researchers going to the Berg Collection must 
clamber up not only the wide marble staircases on 
the outside of the building, between the two famed 
lions, aptly named Patience and Fortitude, but also 
the broad, impressive staircases within The New 
York Public Library. Although their destination is 
only the third floor, it seems as if they have tack¬ 
led the Empire State Building itself. The rooms are 
located down a long marble-walled hallway in the 
northeast corner. The main room feels like a Victo¬ 
rian gentleman’s study, with its high ornate vaulted 
ceiling, built-in glass-enclosed bookcases, tall oil 
paintings, bronze and marble busts, and random 
odds and ends—like a quaint writing desk and chair 
belonging to one Charles Dickens. Two of the paint- 


Figure i. The Frontispiece (top, 191X118 
mm) andTYie Duchess in the Kitchen 
(bottom, 131X147 mm), John Tenniel, 
post-publication drawings, both pencil on 
board, both from The Henry W. and Albert A. 
Berg Collection of English and American Litera¬ 
ture, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox 
and Tilden Loundations (hereafter, The Berg 
Collection, NYPL). All drawings are shown full 
size with their wide margins cropped, except where 
noted. All tracings are shown with mounting 
boards cropped. All dimensions are the full paper. 

4 Ft f 

* % 1 

•' + ^ .V / 1 

\ V 1 . 

nwK V + r j.m ^ 

me\ EL * .■/ 

\ f ;\ » Ifl 1 

j ,_ jfr 

■hr-' fa* Ft* 


^ ' .5 * j. 


iAijd '$* 


^AnTl ^ v ^ 

\ y*^kv " 


tsiffW ' 'V, 

i -.r 

g 3 tjL 



ings are of the Berg brothers, Albert A. Berg being 
one of the three main contributors to the collection. 
Owen D. Young and W. T. H. Howe are the other 
two contributors, the former being represented by a 
bronze bust atop a tall card catalogue and the latter, 
well, he’s—in a true Victorian spirit—silently lurking 
about the place. 

To see all the Berg’s post-publication drawings 
for Alice , researchers must 
fill out—while still trying 
to catch their breaths— 
four individual call slips. 

One slip will be for 
an 1866 version of Won¬ 
derland rebound by Riv¬ 
iere in blue morocco 
adorned with a hubbed 
spine, gilded lettering, 
floral designs, and gilded 
leaves. Tipped into its 
pages are two drawings 
by John Tenniel: the one 
of the King calling the 
next witness (the frontis¬ 
piece, Figure 1, top) and 
the other of Alice danc¬ 
ing the Lobster-Quadrille 
with the Mock Turtle and 
the Gryphon, both draw¬ 
ings appearing opposite their respective prints. 

Another slip will be for a red morocco solander 
case, or book-box, designed by Riviere to look like a 
book, and to be shelved like a book, complete with a 
hubbed spine and gilded lettering. Cushioned within 
its soft, red moire silk lining and under several silk- 
covered chemises, or leaves, lies a matted drawing of 
the Duchess in the kitchen (Figure 1, bottom). It is 
unique among the Berg’s drawings for being the only 
one that is not a mirror image of the print. 

Yet another slip will be for an exquisitely de¬ 
signed, precious . . . well, it’s a manila envelope, actu¬ 
ally! It protects a matted illustration of “The Walrus 
and the Carpenter,” when the Walrus declares “Now 
if you’re ready, Oysters dear.” It is unique amongst 
the set for being the only one for Looking-Glass , and 
for being the only one once owned by Berg; all the 
others derive from the Young collection. (The manila 
envelope is a prime example of how collectors ever so 
subtly slight the better book.) 

Our last slip is for another red morocco book- 
box with hubbed spine and gilded printing (Figure 
2); in fact, it was made by Stikeman to match the first. 
Within a soft, red moire silk lining and under several 
silk-covered chemises lies a stack of twenty unmatted 
post-publication drawings, all separated by tissue pa¬ 
per. The drawing paper is surprisingly thin but with 

wide margins, cut to varied sizes. Stacked beneath 
these drawings are eighteen tracings, each of which is 
mounted on a larger board (128 by 166 mm) by way 
of a light dab of glue on each corner, some of which 
have become unglued. The paper color is brown, and 
curiously dark. But if we run just a few blocks south 
to The Morgan Library we will find in their collec¬ 
tion—after we wash our hands, of course—an album 
of Punch sketches. Three of 
them have tracings, dating 
from 1888 to 1890, and all 
are on the same brown trac¬ 
ing paper. 3 (For examples 
of the drawings and the 
tracings, see Figures 3-7, 
and Table 1 for a full list.) 

Atop the drawings is an 
old typewritten list—likely 
created in the 1940s when 
the collection came to the 
library—of all forty-two il¬ 
lustrations in Wonderland 
with one column for draw¬ 
ings and another for trac¬ 
ings, indicating which ones 
the library holds. It’s a con¬ 
fusing affair, as it includes 
all the drawings in the book 
box and the companion box, 
although the companion box item is crossed out, 
and penciled in are the two illustrations bound in 
the aforementioned book. These penciled amend¬ 
ments are represented on the catalogue card, which 
reads: “Tenniel, John. 22 original drawings, signed, 
with tracings of 18 of them, for C. L. Dodgson’s ‘Al¬ 
ice’s [AJdventures in Wonderland.’” Added below 
is a note that two of the drawings are in the book, 
and below that is a cross reference to the companion 
book-box. 4 

In one sense, the phrase on the catalogue card 
“with tracings of 18 of them” is accurate and in an¬ 
other sense careless. It is accurate in that the tracings 
are a subset of the twenty drawings in the box, and 
not some random unrelated set. That is, there is no 
tracing without a companion drawing. Or, looking 
at it another way, two tracings are lost. The phrase is 
carelessly worded, however, in that it sounds as if Ten¬ 
niel traced the drawings themselves. It is, of course, 
the other way around. These tracings are not of the 
drawings, but were created for the drawings. In the 
same way that an artist may have a painting and stud¬ 
ies created for that painting, Tenniel had his post-pub¬ 
lication drawings and tracings for them. To be clear, 
these are the tracings used to create the drawings and 
they are not the tracings he used to transfer sketches 
onto wood for an engraver to cut. 








Border Art 

Size (mm) 


Border Art 

Size (mm) 


Rabbit with Watch 








A Little Door 







Drink Me 


141^, 66 





Rabbit Scurries Away 







Alice in Pool of Tears 







Father William with Eel 






Fish Footmen 






Duchess in Kitchen 







Hatter Reciting Twinkle 


173^, 166, 103^ 





Dormouse and Teapot 


150^, 110^ 





The Three Gardeners 






Alice with Flamingo 






Executioner’s Argument 







Alice and Duchess 


188^< Unknown 





Sleeping Gryphon 








Mock Turtle’s Story 







The Lobster 






W. Rabbit as Herald 







Hatter Standing 








Hatter Running 


10^, 173^ 






Tipped in 




Dancing the Quadrille 

book (1866) 




Duchess in Kitchen 





Walrus Talking 




Note: Many of the drawings and 
are shown by the 1866 edition’s 
paper or tracing paper. 

a few of the tracings have random “border art,” drawings in the margins from other illustrations. These 
page number (with “F” for frontispiece and -< for reverse image). Dimensions represent the size of the 

Table i. Tenniel’s Post-Publication Drawings and Tracings for Alice in the Berg Collection. 


“Indeed, at the present time I have a huge undertak¬ 
ing on hand, in which I take great delight,” Tenniel 
stated in an aside when talking about his weekly Punch 
schedule, “the finishing of scores of my sketches, of 
which I have many hundreds. They are for a friend— 
an enthusiastic admirer, if I may be permitted to say 
so.” 5 Writers often replace this unidentified “enthusi¬ 
astic admirer” with an ellipsis ( ... ), because it’s off- 
topic from the main point: how Tenniel worked. But 
this enthusiastic admirer is important for understand¬ 
ing archival material. He (most likely male) shows 
that Tenniel created not only individual artworks as 
gifts from time to time but also batches of artwork. 
He explains the uniformity in the set of twenty post¬ 

publication drawings housed in the book-box, all on 
identical paper with identical margins (although, 
admittedly, varied sizes). This admirer also explains 
the uniformity in the companion tracings, all with the 
same degree of detail, all with penciled framing box¬ 
es, and all on identical brown tracing paper. But as we 
will see later, the drawings may owe their existence 
not to a collector but to an event. 

Nonetheless, collectors (assuming more than 
one for the time being) did eventually receive the 
drawings. One imagines they were pleasantly amused 
with the faux doodles scattered around the borders, 
for they were actually traced by Tenniel from other 
illustrations in the Alice books— a concept unique 
to the Berg’s set. (Harvard has three post-publication 


drawings with secondary drawings, but they are larger 
and have an entirely different presentation. See fig¬ 
ure 8.) The Berg’s drawing of Alice holding a flamin¬ 
go while conversing with the Duchess, for example, 
has a doodle of just the little frog from the illustration 
where Alice defends herself from the deck of cards 
flying at her. Just why Tenniel added these bonuses— 
fifteen of the twenty have them—is unknown. They 
do, however, show his playfulness and, being extra 
bits thrown in, perhaps even his generosity—a trait of 
his illustrated and specifically mentioned in Frankie 
Morris’s biography of the artist. 6 

And these collectors were likely pleased with the 
artwork’s fineness , being, hopefully, connoisseurs who 
took “great delight”—like Tenniel’s “enthusiastic ad¬ 
mirer”—in the artist’s meticulous cross-hatching and 
careful draftsmanship. Then again, perhaps they were 
philistines who were only wowed because the draw¬ 
ings were “the wrong ways ’roun’.” Just why Tenniel 
created such a bulky set of post-publication drawings 
is unknown (although a likely theory will be present¬ 
ed later in this article). One could surmise that he 
was demonstrating what he actually drew on the block 
for Wonderland , the work that he created with such 
care, beauty, and skill, and that was ultimately obliter¬ 
ated. In this way, instead of seeing these drawings as 
secondary, as unimportant in the history of the Alice 
books, we can perhaps see them as faithful represen¬ 
tations—with a modicum of latitude—of what was cut 
away before the unscrupulous engraver gored them 
with his scorper. 7 

But hasn’t it been argued that Tenniel did not 
draw on the wood for Wonderland? And hasn’t it been 
argued that, when he did draw on the wood he did 
not create a detailed composition, and his engrav¬ 
ers completed the illustration, adding backgrounds, 
repositioning figures, and even creating their own 
cross-hatching? 8 

There is a plethora of arguments against the lat¬ 
ter idea, but we will restrict ourselves to a few. The 
first is from a letter in the Berg Collection itself that 
Tenniel wrote to George Bendy on November 6, 
1871, only months after finishing the Looking-Glass 
drawings: “I am completely weary of drawing on 
wood: perfectly sick of wood engraving....” 9 If he 
only loosely sketched on the wood, he would hardly 
be speaking of it in such terms. (Auxiliary to this, 
Tenniel, referring to his Punch habits, said, “on Fri¬ 
day morning I begin, and stick to it all day, with my 
nose well down on the blocK’ [italics added]. 10 Again, 
all day on the block isn’t for creating a mere sketch, 
one to be recomposed by another.) Second, there is 
an uncut woodblock Tenniel drew for Punch , which 
is as detailed as his post-publication drawings. 11 And 
last, we have an eyewitness, E. J. Milliken, writing, 
“Anyone who has seen, as the present writer has been 

privileged to do, many of Tenniel’s cartoons in their 
pristine state of strong yet delicate pencil-drawings on 
the box-wood block, must keenly regret the unavoid¬ 
able loss of such a mass of masterly artistic achieve¬ 
ment.” 12 This feeling, inadvertently plagiarized two 
paragraphs above, is an apt description of the feeling 
one gets when viewing the post-publication drawings 
in the Berg. They are exquisite. It can only be hoped 
that their reproduction here—for the first time—can 
half-capture their beauty. 

We may add an argument as well, directly relat¬ 
ed to Looking-Glass. Of the many comments Tenniel 
makes on the proofs—advising the Dalziel brothers 
what to lighten, what was cut too thick, or what to cut 
away completely—never does it sound as if the design 
of the image were a collaborative effort. On the proof 
where Alice watches the two Knights battle, Tenniel 
complains that the “White Knight + Horse a great 
deal too dark. Split coarse black lines” and adds this 
telling complaint: “The figure was quite gray on the 
drawing.” Likewise, on the proof where Alice is in the 
Sheep’s shop, Tenniel writes that Alice’s “Face should 
have been darker ’ [double underline] , 13 Both of these 
comments refer back to the wood drawing they cut 
away, and imply it was the standard to follow. Tenniel 
sometimes even directs the engravers to make some¬ 
thing darker or lighter than he has drawn it. Though 
the final image was indeed a collaboration between 
the artist and the engraver, some scholars, with their 
goody-two-shoes tightly laced, depict the relationship 
as if between two equals. But the evidence, at least in 
Tenniel’s case, does not support this claim. 14 

And what of the idea that Tenniel did not draw on 
wood for Wonderland? The evidence for this concept 
seems to be based solely on the fact that, although 
there are extant tracings for Looking-Glass , when Ten¬ 
niel is transferring his sketches to the block, there are 
no such extant tracings for Wonderland. Therefore, 
Tenniel did not draw on the block for Wonderland. 
First, much of Tenniel’s artwork for the Alice books 
was batched up and tipped into books. Though sev¬ 
eral of these books have a mix of tracings, drawings, 
and proofs, some do specialize. So, it is very possible 
that the tracings were in one such book that happens 
not to be extant. In fact, where is item 7c? This item, 
a copy of Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland , owned by Jo¬ 
seph Widener, was shown in the exhibition at Colum¬ 
bia University celebrating the one hundredth anni¬ 
versary of Carroll’s birth in 1832. 15 Contained within 
its pages, opposite each corresponding illustration, 
were forty original drawings. Whatever they were— 
perhaps tracings?—they are all lost to us. In fact, giv¬ 
en that an overwhelming majority (83 of 92) of Ten- 
niel’s illustrations for the Alice books have only one 
extant sketch, it is probable that item 7c is the missing 
tracings. (Perhaps it was a companion to the Looking- 


Figure 3 . Dormouse in Teapot, John Tenniel, 
tracing ; pencil on tracing paper, 84 X 95 mm 
(right); and post-publication drawing , pencil 
on paper, 177 X 128 mm (far right), both from 
The Berg Collection, NYPL. 

Figure 4 . The White Rabbit as Herald, 

John Tenniel, tracing, pencil on tracing paper 
115 X 85 mm (right); and post-publication draw¬ 
ing, pencil on paper, 172 X 126 mm far right), 
both from The Berg Collection, NYPL. 


The teacup above the March Hare is the same as 
the one by the Hatter’s leg, of course, but Alice’s 
face is harder to place, though it seems to be a 
reverse image of Alice taken from the later illustra¬ 
tion when she dances the Quadrille. 

v i T TTTrtlT|p , P^«T}m. *]; i it r- 

The image in the margin is taken from an earlier illus¬ 
tration when the White Rabbit “scurried away into the 
darkness. ” This is one of the four drawings that has 
a pencil boarder as if the drawing was once mounted 
and framed. 


Figure 5 . The White Rabbit Holding his Watch, 

John Tenniel, tracing, pencil on tracing paper, 114 X 81 mm 
(right); and post-publication drawing, pencil on paper, 
171 X118 mm (far right), both from 
The Berg Collection, NYPL. 

Glass volume with thirty-five tracings, three drawings, 
and two touched proofs currently in a private collec¬ 
tion.) Second, Carroll tells us at least two times, once 
outright and once more by inference, that Tenniel 
drew on the wood for Wonderland. “Thence I went to 
Tenniel’s,” he wrote in his diary, “who showed me one 
drawing on wood , the only thing he had, of Alice sitting 
by the pool of tears, and the rabbit hurrying away” 
[emphasis added]. Ten months later, Carroll implies 
that Tenniel is drawing on wood when he concludes 
that the fault with the first printing of Wonderland lies 
in the illustrations, and includes Tenniel’s fee of £138 
for redrawing on the wood. 16 Naturally, if Tenniel 
drew only on paper, having the Dalziels transfer the 
drawing, he would not have had to redo his work. 

We can add some documentary evidence from 
Tenniel’s side, as well, that he and no other drew on 
the blocks for Wonderland. If we simply run back down 
to the Morgan Library, we will find—after washing 
our hands—a letter from Tenniel to the Dalziel broth¬ 
ers, dated January 11, 1870. With a business-as-usual 
tone, Tenniel writes his engravers, “Are you disposed 
to undertake the engraving of another little book for 
Mr. Dodgson? It is a continuation of ‘Alice’s Adven¬ 
tures,’ and I am going to work upon it at once.” He 

wrote this simple line without any qualifications or 
clarifications, only adding the plea: “One line please 
to say ‘yes’ and I’ll let you know the size of blocks 
etc.” And he even signed it, as he could handle such 
simple business, “in much haste / Yours very truly / 
J. Tenniel.” 17 These men worked together on several 
books before Wonderland and knew each other well. 
If they had uncharacteristically worked differently for 
that one book for that naive don, it would surely have 
been mentioned in this letter. But no. All it took was a 
hastily written letter and a one-line response—no dis¬ 
cussion needed about who would draw on the wood. 
Tenniel would. 

Thus, if we accept these arguments, it is fair to 
propose that these reverse-image, post-publication 
drawings in the Berg Collection accurately imitate— 
with a modicum of latitude—what Tenniel drew on 
the block for Wonderland. 

But this brings up a curious issue with the trac¬ 
ings Tenniel included with these drawings. If in the 
drawings , Tenniel is recreating the process of drawing 
on wood, could he in the tracings be recreating the 
process of transferring the drawing onto the wood? 
That is, could the tracings have been mocked up for 
show and added to the bundle without truly being 


Note the added haystack and windmill below the umbrella’s 
handle and another haystack upper right. The drawing is 
the only one in the Berg’s set of twenty that adds elements 
not otherwise in the original illustration. 

used to create the drawings? And could the drawings 
have been created through some other means, with 
the aid of a light box, for example, or with the aid 
of some mechanical, Victorian, //wgo-like contraption 
projecting the image onto the paper? (To be perfectly 
clear, the drawings are not “eyeballed” by the artist; 
the main outline of the characters and objects, the 
textures, the shadows, and even insignificant details 
such as the scribbling, are reproduced to a nearly ex¬ 
act degree.) 

There are also a couple of mysteries about the 
tracings that suggest we must investigate their implied 
function. First, there is the Mystery of the Backward 
Bunny (Figure 5). Since the drawings are all reverse 
images, the tracings, one would expect, should all be 
non-reverse images, with Tenniel tracing the illustra¬ 
tion from a copy of the book or from a copy of a proof 
he happened to have lying about. But one tracing 
of the eighteen is a reverse image—the White Rab¬ 
bit holding his pocket watch, which begins the first 
chapter. How is this possible? Second, there is the 
small Mystery of the Graphite Ghosts (or the Invis¬ 
ibility Thereof). That is, there are no tracing marks, 
no shadowy lines left ghosting about the drawings. If 
Tenniel rubbed the lines of the tracings onto the pa¬ 

per and drew atop them, and occasionally to the side 
of them, why do we not see these shadowy lines, these 
ghosts? How did he erase the thicker, rubbed-down 
tracing without smearing the thinner line drawn over 
it? The drawings appear remarkably crisp. These are 
troublesome points. But let us first prove that the trac¬ 
ings were used to create the drawings and allow that 
proof—if it be so—to inspire us to address these snags 

“give your evidence” 

There are three principal ways to show if a tracing is 
an intermediary between the published print and the 
post-publication drawing. The first is by deviation. If a 
certain line on the drawing deviates from the print¬ 
ed version, can we see it as being influenced by the 
tracing? For example, the White Rabbit’s eye in the 
illustration of him holding his pocket-watch is notice¬ 
ably smaller in the drawing than the print. Indeed, 
the eye is smaller on the tracing: it is likely an influ¬ 
ence. The second method is by omission. If a certain 
line is omitted from the tracing, is it omitted in the 
drawing as well, or is it replaced but notably dissimi¬ 
lar in the drawing? For example, in the same illus¬ 
tration, the tracing is missing the White Rabbit’s tail. 


Figure 6. Father William Balancing an Eel on 

his Nos e, John Tenniel , tracing ; pencil on trac¬ 
ing paper, 9.9 X 7.5 mm (right); and post-publi¬ 
cation drawing, pencil on paper, 18.2 X 13.2 mm 
(far right), both from The Berg Collection, NYPL. 

In the drawing, the tail appears, but it is shaped and 
placed differently. Tenniel is obviously referring back 
to the drawing, not the tracing, and estimating the 
tail’s proper shape and location—or in the parlance 
of the artist, he’s eyeballing it. The third method is 
by negligence. Occasionally, Tenniel fails to draw over 
lines rubbed down from the tracing, leaving them 
raw, exactly as they were from the tracing. Though 
rare, they leave on the drawing an indisputable con¬ 
nection to the tracing, being “carbon copies” (say) of 
the original. 

Let’s take a deep dive into one of the illustra¬ 
tions and a bit of a shallower dive into another, 
and an even shallower—well, a belly flop—into the 
rest. The purpose here is not only to show the re¬ 
lationship between the drawing and the tracing but 
to show as well, in a microscopic way, how Tenniel 
worked. Hopefully, this will bring us a bit closer to 
the artist and allow us to understand him through 
the minutiae of his work. 

Figure 6 shows the drawing and the tracing for the 
illustration of Father William after his son remarked, 
“you balanced an eel on the end of your nose.” There 
are three significant omissions on the tracing. First, the 
fishing line that droops down from the fishing pole is 
missing. It appears on the drawing but with consider¬ 
ably less droop (a). Second, three birds over the eel 
traps were not traced. Likewise, although they appear 
in the drawing, they are in slightly different positions 
(b). And third, the top sock line for the son’s outer 
foot was not traced. This caused Tenniel to make a 
correction, drawing the missing line over a lower but¬ 
ton (added in confusion) and prompting him to add 
a third button above the other two, effectively mak¬ 
ing all three buttons higher on the drawing, although 
they were correct on the tracing (c). 

There are three significant deviations on the trac¬ 
ing. First, two lines representing the glimmering 
water below the eel traps are traced more horizon¬ 
tally, while the other glimmer lines, unlike those in 
the print, are traced short of the border where they 
reach the border in the print. Both these differences 
are reflected in the drawing (d). Also, a strong line 
in the inaccurately traced branches produced a more 
distinct branch in the drawing, not found in the print 
(e). And last, the shading for the son’s forward foot is 
higher in the drawing and in the tracing (f). 

There is also evidence by negligence that connects 
these two pieces of art. Although Tenniel traced the 
bow for the son’s upper sleeve garter (on the arm in 
the foreground), he failed to pencil over it on the 
drawing. It appears here in its rubbed-down state only, 
as a “ghost,” which explains its light appearance on 
the drawing (g). When we focus in on the bow, enlarg¬ 
ing it, we see a perfect similarity in the contours of the 
lines, which does not occur when he draws over the 
rubbed lines. But we also see what makes up the lines 
microscopically, their DNA, with all the inner squig- 
gles caused by the particles of graphite and the fibers 
of the paper. And these elements on the tracing match 
speck for speck, squiggle for squiggle, those that are 
on the drawing. There can be only one conclusion: 
the tracing is—beyond a shadow of a doubt—guilty. 

It should be made clear that what Tenniel fails to 
trace does not always appear different in the drawing. 
He was an artist and obviously had the skill to replace 
missing characteristics accurately. For example, he 
does not trace the short vertical lines on the top bar 
supporting the eel baskets (h). These lines, however, 
appear almost exactly as they do in the drawing. 

Let’s now take a close look at Figure 7, the illustra¬ 
tion of the Cheshire Cat above the croquet grounds 


The drawing does not have any border art, like four 
others in the set. The reason Tenniel added these 
“doodles ” is unknown but they almost certainly 
helped collectors and sellers misclassify the drawings, 
a topic that will be explored in part 2. 

The evidence that the tracing was used for the drawing is shown against a shadowed mirror image of 
the printed woodblock. Examples (a), (b), and (c) show a relationship through omissions, examples (d), 
(e), and (f) through deviations. The last example (g) shows a relationship through negligence. 

Printed Illustration 


Figure 7 . The Executioner’s 
Argument, John Tenniel, tracing, 
pencil on tracing paper, 10.4 X 8.0 mm 
(right); and post-publication drawing, 
pencil on paper, 16.95 X 12.5 mm (far 
right), both from The Berg Collection, 

where the Executioner—with his open palm and with 
the Queen’s glare upon him—is likely presenting 
his argument: “that you couldn’t cut off a head un¬ 
less there was a body to cut it off from.” There are 
three noticeable omissions on the tracing. First, on the 
King’s side of the drawing, several diagonal sky lines 
were not traced and likewise do not appear on the 
drawing. Second, the tip of the King’s middle finger 
on his forwardmost hand was not traced, and it is like¬ 
wise missing on the drawing. And most surprisingly, 
the tracing does not have the Queen’s suspicious stare 
upon the Executioner, which is true of the drawing as 
well. This is odd as it seems to be one of the more 
amusing aspects of the illustration. There are several 
points of deviation , but we will hold ourselves to two. 
On the tracing Tenniel seems to have lengthened the 
forefinger of the Executioner’s forwardmost hand, 
confusing it with cross-hatching lines, making it, and 
the other fingers, appear somewhat longer in the 

drawing. And the Queen’s brooch is traced ambigu¬ 
ously and appears somewhat higher in the drawing. 

There are several characteristics that were not 
traced but were added quite accurately. Tenniel does 
not trouble himself, for example, to detail the diago¬ 
nal lines on the King’s robe that cover his shoulder 
and outermost upper arm. Yet they are filled in with 
some accuracy. Tenniel is no doubt referring back to 
the drawing. Since these drawings are in reverse, he 
may be using a mirror, propping the drawing up per¬ 
haps in a hinged V-shaped bi-frame, with the drawing 
on one side and the mirror in the other. 

The connection between the tracing and the 
drawings can be seen in the other illustrations in the 
Berg’s solander case. In the drawing of the Dormouse 
being stuffed into the teapot (Figure 3), the spoon 
in the cup by the Hatter’s leg was not traced ( omis¬ 
sion ) and appears significantly more horizontal in the 
drawing. Of the two oval designs on the teapot, the 


If readers would like to find other devia¬ 
tions from those in the article, take a look 
at the Queen’s nose, the king behind the 
King of Heart’s hair, and the Cat’s King- 
side incisor tooth along with his tabby lines 
on his forehead. 

one on the Hatter’s side was not traced accurately 
( deviation ) and appears noticeably bigger in the draw¬ 
ing. The drawing also contains some more damaging 
“DNA” evidence. The head of the wheat stalk that 
protrudes from the March Hare’s head, and which 
points toward the Hatter, was traced and rubbed 
down. But it was not drawn over ( negligence ) and only 
partially erased, leaving an undisputable link to the 
drawings’ source material. In the illustration of the 
White Rabbit clad as a Herald (Figure 4), Tenniel 
traced the paper unraveling from the scroll ambigu¬ 
ously ( deviation ), causing it to be a bit more unrav¬ 
eled in the drawing. The drawing also includes and 
excludes ( omission ) the shading lines in the bow from 
the tracing, not the print, even adding an extra line 
across the center knot ( deviation ) only found in the 
tracing. And lastly, the Hatter’s thumb holding the 
bread, in the illustration of him running (to appear 
in the next issue of KL ), is elongated on the tracing 

( deviation ) and appears so on the drawing. His teeth 
were also ambiguously traced ( deviation ) and appear 
somewhat obscured in the drawing. 

But the most telling connections between the 
drawings and the tracings are found in the indescrib¬ 
able scribblings and shadings that give the drawings 
texture and dimension. Tenniel can either choose to 
trace these elements exactly or choose, as is often the 
case, not to trace them at all. When he does choose 
to trace them, they often appear to mimic the draw¬ 
ing but when he chooses otherwise, they are either 
left out entirely or they are rendered differently. Take 
for example, the scribble directly behind the hat in 
the illustration of the Hatter running. The lower half 
was traced and appears so on the drawing. The upper 
half was not and appears altered. These elements may 
be tedious to describe in the body of this paper but 
they are as equal a proof as a line sagging down from 
a fishing pole. 


Some may argue that there is a confirmation bias 
in our methodology, and that any tracing will show 
some influence by chance alone. Luckily, the Berg 
has one tracing for two post-publication drawings for 
the Duchess in the kitchen, one in reverse and one 
non-reverse. There are at least thirteen different clues 
that point to a connection between the tracing and 
the reverse drawing. Sadly, most of these points are te¬ 
dious matters. For example, the vertical shadow line in 
front of Alice’s nose is curved the opposite way on the 
tracing and indeed is the same in the drawing. There 
is also an extra line on the tracing for the table leg 
behind Alice’s posterior. This errant line produced a 
very differently styled table leg on the drawing, one 
that appears catty-corner to the table. But of these 
thirteen differences, only one could be shown to have 
influenced the non-reverse drawing at the Berg. Ten- 
niel did not trace the ash shovel or small peel leaning 
on the cabinet near the cat. It is rendered on the re¬ 
verse drawing with a squarer head and appears indeed 
to be a shovel rather than a peel. On the non-reverse 
drawing it is simply absent. No other connections, out¬ 
side of the initial thirteen, could be made between the 
non-reverse illustration and the tracing, leaving only 
one conclusion possible: the tracing is very highly like¬ 
ly to be unrelated to the drawing. 18 

“sentence first- 
verdict afterwards” 

Now we are ready for those two bugaboos: the Mys¬ 
tery of the Backward Bunny and the Mystery of the 
Graphite Ghosts (or The Invisibility Thereof)? When 
Tenniel drew for the wood—as opposed to working 
on post-publication drawings—his drawings and trac¬ 
ings were always non-reverse images. Always! Except 
when they were not. That is, even in his real work we 
have abnormalities. In the Berg Collection itself, for 
example, in the volume of drawings and tracings for 
Once a Week , there is a tracing that is in reverse of the 
drawing and final print. Another illustration has both 
the drawing and tracing in reverse, and there are two 
tracings without drawings that are in reverse of the 
final print. 19 Remember, all should be non-reverse im¬ 
ages (except for the drawing on the block, which is 
ultimately destroyed). Those willing to make another 
run a few blocks south will find another example of 
this anomaly—perhaps too frequent to call such—in 
a volume of Punch drawings in the Morgan Library. 
Of the three drawings that have tracings, one trac¬ 
ing is in reverse of the drawing and final print. 20 Late 
changes in orientation can be due either to the illus¬ 
tration changing from one side of a two-page spread 
to the other, or to Tenniel simply having a change of 
heart. Either way, if these oddities appear in his every¬ 
day work, why should we be concerned with them ap¬ 
pearing here, for his post-publication work? 

The explanation for the White Rabbit’s about 
face could simply be that Tenniel at first decided to 
create a set of non-reverse images. If so, it would be no 
coincidence that the one odd tracing is the very first 
in the set, appearing chronologically first in the story, 
at least. Tenniel could have created it by flipping over 
a proof of the illustration and tracing it on a window 
pane, in lieu of a light box. This technique is facili¬ 
tated by the fact that many proofs were printed on 
light India paper—and we have evidence in the Berg 
Collection itself of this easy-to-see-through material 
being used for Wonderland and Looking-Glass proofs. 

Once Tenniel had a change of heart or realized 
he had made an error, he did not have to recreate his 
tracing. Remember, this tracing of the White Rabbit 
has no tail and a smaller eye, and we have committed 
ourselves to the idea that since the tail is in a differ¬ 
ent location and the eye is smaller on the post-publi¬ 
cation drawing, this tracing must have been used; its 
influence resides in the drawing. The following sce¬ 
nario may solve the Mystery of the Backward Bunny: 
Tenniel turned over a proof of the illustration (Image 
A), placed a piece of tracing paper over it and traced 
it from a window (Image B), rubbed it onto a piece 
of drawing paper (Image C), had a change of heart— 
realizing he wanted to create reverse images—and 
turned Image C over and rubbed it onto a fresh piece 
of drawing paper (Image D). This method would 
have produced an image in the same orientation as 
the original (Image A). If this process were used, then 
Paper D is our post-publication drawing, and Paper B 
our tracing. Paper C is disposed of for reasons we will 
see below. Depending on the paper and the pencil, 
there is little loss in this generational approach, and 
it can often go through other generations. 21 

But what about bugaboo number two, the Graph¬ 
ite Ghosts (or the Invisibility Thereof)? Indeed, the 
drawings are very clean, immaculate; the papers 
show no signs of first having graphite rubbed down 
on them. No unsightly, coarse rubbed down lines ap¬ 
pear on any of the drawings in the Berg or elsewhere 
for that matter. The solution is even more straight¬ 
forward as above: rubbed down graphite merely sits 
atop the paper and is easily removable with a putty 
eraser, whereas graphite applied directly with a pen¬ 
cil is somewhat engraved in the paper and is harder 
to remove with a putty eraser. What is a putty eraser, 
sometimes called a kneaded eraser? As the names im¬ 
ply, they are doughy and a tad tacky. They allow the 
artist either to rub the graphite away or gently dab the 
graphite away. Since there is no eraser dust and the 
graphite particles are absorbed into the eraser, art¬ 
ists knead the erasers to spread the particles around, 
which makes the erasers reusable. Once they become 
too saturated with graphite, however, they are dis¬ 
carded. In other words, Tenniel knew that dabbing 


Figure 8. Dormouse in Teapot and The White Rabbit as Herald, John Tenniel, post¬ 
publication drawing, pencil on thick board, 131 X201 mm (slightly reduced), from MS 
Eng 718.6(4), Houghton Library, Harvard University. The collection has two other boards 
with the same artistic presentation, that is, with a complete and an incomplete drawing. 

his drawings with a semi-sticky putty rubber 22 would 
remove the unstable graphite weakly lying atop the 
paper (tracings) but would leave the engraved graph¬ 
ite (drawn lines) virtually unharmed. If need be, he 
could also shape the kneaded eraser into a point to 
attack “ghosting” lines near delicately drawn lines. As¬ 
tute readers now understand why Image C above was 
not kept. It was likely disposed of, or erased, because 
it was just graphite sitting atop the paper and not in¬ 
side the paper: it was insecure, vulnerable, and had 
little chance of being preserved, being easily smear- 
able. 23 Admittedly, it was also redundant. 

With these mysteries solved, we have all we need 
in place to review Tenniel’s process for creating post¬ 
publication drawings. 

Tracing. For reverse images, Tenniel placed a 
piece of tracing paper over the drawing and traced 
the front side. For non-reverse images, he either used 
a second-generation rubbing or traced the backside 
of a proof on a window. He traced with a high degree 
of accuracy—but at times not quite perfectly—the es¬ 
sential outlines of the drawings. But he also copied 

secondary elements such as nondescript squiggly 
lines and wall shading. To alleviate an undue amount 
of erasing, he would leave some elements untraced, 
such as areas where cross-hatching would appear. 

Transferring. For reverse images, Tenniel placed 
his tracing upside down on top of his drawing paper, of 
which he used many kinds, from thin to various thick 
boards. Instead of going over each line with a tracing 
stylus (as described in several books), it is more likely 
that he swiftly brushed the whole of the tracing down 
with a wide wooden burnisher, or he may even have 
used his own thumbnail. For non-reverse images, he 
simply repeated this process, creating a second-gener¬ 
ation transfer. (There is no evidence that Tenniel se¬ 
cured his paper down while tracing or transferring, as 
art books often recommend. If he did so, he is more 
likely to have done so in the former stage where it 
takes more time.) 

Drawing. This stage and the stages to follow are 
harder to delineate and quite possibly occurred con¬ 
currently. Nonetheless, Tenniel likely began by draw¬ 
ing over the main contours of the figures, perhaps 


even beginning on the face or faces. As seen above, 
he drew over the traced lines with a good degree of 
accuracy. Unlike drawing on wood, where he had a 
bit more freedom to wander from his tracing, here 
he is in facsimile mode, like his engravers, perhaps 
even drawing a bit slower. He is his own forger, trac¬ 
ing his own signature, but trying to appear loose and 

Erasing (rubbing). To see the drawing all the better, 
at this time he likely erased the “graphite ghosts” with 
a kneaded eraser. As even a kneaded eraser may pick 
up some delicate, lightly drawn penciled lines, Ten- 
niel likely completed this task before continuing onto 
the next stage. 

Shading and Cross-Hatching. Now, with solid, clean, 
lines before him, he began to give the drawing dimen¬ 
sion by adding shading and—his bread and butter— 
cross-hatching. He likely continually consulted the 
original (in a mirror or not), perhaps even adding 
in details he failed to trace (like bunny tails). This is 
where the drawing turns from a child’s play, a color¬ 
ing book, into a mature piece of art. 

Reviewing. Given Tenniel’s personality, it is likely 
that at some later time—perhaps even days later— 
he put his critical eye on the drawing and added a 
few deft touches here and there, before declaring 
the thing complete, a masterpiece, and throwing his 
pencil against the wall, and bursting out with a self- 
congratulatory “Voila!” 

In truth, no one has ever witnessed Tenniel per¬ 
forming that last stage, especially that last gesture, 
but we may all be witnesses to the Shading and Cross- 
Hatching stage. If we simply travel back in time, sneak 
into his studio and peek over his shoulder, we can 
see him busily working on a post-publication drawing 
of the Dormouse being stuffed into the teapot. On 
closer inspection, we can see that the main drawing 
is complete and he is actually working on a side draw¬ 
ing, the White Rabbit as a herald (see Figure 8). Un¬ 
like the Berg’s faux doodles, this appears to be a full 
drawing. Though it is difficult to see—with his fist in 
the way—he seems to be attentively putting shading 
and cross-hatching on the upper half of the rabbit. 
He picks the board up and after a brief inspection de¬ 
clares it finished, signaled by the faintest (hardly even 
a whisper) “voila.” Fortunately, he allows us to get 
closer by suddenly dropping the board and running 
out. Indeed, the drawing is incomplete—the rabbit’s 
legs and the scroll in his hand are still mere outlines, 
though he has reinforced the burnished traced lines 
and cleaned them up with his putty eraser. Since this 
is only a side drawing, a companion to the main draw¬ 
ing, he seems to have purposely left it incomplete. 
Sadly, we must leave before finding out why he so 
abruptly darted out of the room, as if an eerie feeling 
began to creep up his spine. 

[Part 2 of this article will appear in our next issue. You ’ll 
discover why Tenniel created a set of twenty post-publication 
drawings, how they were sold and resold, and the identity 
of the first collectors to own them. — Ed] 


1 See Justin G. Schiller, “Census: Sir John Tenniel’s 
Original Drawings to Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland 
and Through the Looking-Glass” (hereafter “Census”) 
in Wonderland, An 1865 Printing Re-described and Newly 
Identified as the Publisher’s “File Copy ” with a Revised and 
Expanded Census of the Suppressed 1865 “Alice” Compiled by 
Selwyn H. Goodacre, to Which Is Added, a Short-Title Index 
Identifying and Locating the Original Preliminary Drawings 
by John Tenniel for Mice and Looking-Glass Catalogued by 
Justin G. Schiller (1990: The Jabberwock, Kingston, New 
York). The number of known post-publication drawings 
mentioned includes many not listed by Schiller. 

2 See the Berol’s “copy 4” (Berol PR4611 .A7 1866b) of 
Lewis Carroll, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (London: 
Macmillan, 1866). The Berol has what may also be the 
earliest loose post-publication drawing, one not listed 
in Schiller’s “Census.” It is an image of the mouse 
saying, “Sit down, all of you, and listen to me!” before 
commencing his “dry” tale (p. 29), inscribed “from 
[T] with love, 1866” (not “1868” as the Berol catalogue 
currently states). 

3 John Tenniel, Album of Cartoons for “Punch, ’’Morgan 
Library, accession number 2006.139. The tracings were 
for “Poor Little Bill!” Punch 96, May 25, 1889, p. 251; Thank 
Goodness!!! PunchQS, March 15, 1890, p. 127; and The 
Autumn Meet, Punch95, November 10, 1888, p. 223. The 
color is close to “Viva Gold” SW 6367, a Sherwin-Williams 
shade, recommended for living rooms in coastal towns in 
the southern states. 

4 The illustration in the book of Alice dancing with the 
Mock-Turtle and the Gryphon may have once belonged to 
the set of twenty. It is on the same type of paper (unique 
to the Berg), and its inclusion does bring the total to 
twenty-one, exactly half of the illustrations in Wonderland. 

5 Marion Harry Spielmann, The History of “Punch” 

(London: Cassell, 1895), p. 464. 

6 Frankie Morris, Artist of Wonderland: The Life, Political 
Cartoons, and Illustrations of Tenniel (Charlottesville: 
University of Virginia Press, 2005), p. 4. 

7 “A modicum of latitude” refers to the possibility that 
Tenniel would have sharpened his pencil more often 
when drawing on wood, creating crisper cross-hatching, 
whereas the drawings occasionally take advantage of the 
pencil’s ability to create shade by varying the pressure. 
Some poetic license is used with the word “scorper” 
which sounds like the crudest of all the engraver’s tools 
but is not likely to be the first used, despite being the one 
for clearing out the largest areas (white space). 

8 See Schiller, “Census,” pp. 55-6 for the first question, and 
Percy Muir, Victorian Illustrated Books (London: Portman 
Books, 1971, reprint 1985), pp. 110-11, for the second. It 
is not known if Muir was the first to make this point, but 
he certainly wasn’t the last. 

9 John Tenniel to George Bendy, November 6, 1871, in 
The Berg Collection, The New York Public Library. 

10 Spielmann, The History of “Punch, ”p. 463. 


11 See online, Edward Wakeling, “John Tenniel,” a chapter 
in Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland & Through the 
Looking-Glass (Seashell Press, 2011). This is easy to find 
by simply Googling (no quotation marks): Tenniel uncut 
woodblock. The block was seen in person by the author. 

12 Catalogue of a Collection of Drawings for Punch Cartoons 
&c. by SirJohn Tenniel , prefatory note by E. J. Milliken 
([London?]: Fine Art Society, March 1895), p. 6 . The case 
put forth in this paragraph was masterfully argued as well 
in Frankie Morris’s biography. She uses the same Bendy 
and Spielmann quotations but in a different context. 

13 Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found 
There [Extra-illustrated with a portrait of Tenniel, 27 proofs 
of the illustrations annotated by the artist, and three ALS 
from Tenniel to the Dalziels] (London: Macmillan, 1872), 
pp. 102, 160. The book, at the Morgan Library, is bound in 
brown morocco and has a hubbed spine with gold lettering 
and floral work. Quite impressively, to fit the wide margins 
of the proofs, all the pages, even those with text only, were 
enlarged by paper framing. 

14 The best argument for the subtlety of the collaboration, 
however, would be a full presentation of the history of 
the facsimile process of wood-engraving, how and why 
it developed, and how it was eventually practiced. For 
that, begin with William Vaughan, “Facsimile Versus 
White Line: An Anglo-German Disparity,” in Reading 
Victorian Illustration, 1855-1875: Spoils of the Lumber 
Room, edited by Paul Goldman and Simon Cooke 
(Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2012), pp. 33-52. 
For a nonjudgmental overview of the debate about the 
artistic worth of engravers, see Robert Mevrick, “‘Spoils 
of the lumber-room’: Early Collectors of Wood-Engraved 
Illustrations from 1860s Periodicals,” in ibid., pp. 186-91. 

15 Catalogue of an Exhibition at Columbia University to 
Commemorate the One Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of 
Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson), 1832-1898 (New 
York: Columbia University Press, 1932), p. 8 . 

16 Lewis Carroll, October 12, 1864, in Edward Wakeling, 
Lewis Carroll’s Diaries: The Private Journals of Charles 
Lutwidge Dodgson, vol. 5 (Luton, Beds, England: The 
Lewis Carroll Society, 1999), pp. 16, 100-101. 

17 John Tenniel to the Dalziel brothers, January 11, 1870, in 
The Morgan Library, Accession Number: MA 8703.1. 

18 Where the Berg has one tracing for two drawings, 
Harvard has two tracings for one drawing, a non-reverse 
image of the two fish-footmen (p. 77). William H. Bond 
in his article published the drawing and the more 
complete tracing (reverse), believing the two connected. 
Percy Muir published the drawing and the other 
tracing, one less detailed and non-reverse, believing in 

a connection as well. Clearly, only one author could be 
correct. Laying all atop each other in Photoshop along 
with the print clearly shows Muir to be correct, and Bond 
to be mistaken. Both erroneously believed, however, 
that their respective tracing was of the drawing and not 
created for the drawing, Bond incredibly believing so 
when the tracing was even the wrong way around. See 
William H. Bond, “The Publication of Alice’s Adventures in 
Wonderland, Harvard Library Bulletin 103, Autumn 1956: 
plate III and p. 316; and Percy Muir, Victorian Illustrated 
Books (London: Portman Press, 1985), p. 110. 

19 See the drawings and tracings for July 30, 1859, January 
28, 1860, December 7, 1961, and March 1, 1862 in Once a 
Week, Berg Collection, The New York Public Library. The 
volume is described as “23 original pencil drawings and 

19 tracings for illustrations of various poems and stories 
published in ‘Once a week,’ 1859-1864.” 

20 Tenniel, Album of Cartoons for “Punch, ”in The Morgan 
Library. For the illustration, see Punch 95, November 10, 
1888, p. 223. 

21 Artists can make reverse tracings in one step even if 
the original drawing is impossible to see through. They 
simply lay a piece of tracing paper on top of a piece of 
transfer paper (with the graphite side face up) and place 
the original atop the two. (If they want to protect the 
original, they can even lay a piece of tracing paper over 
it.) This produces a reverse tracing (and another tracing, 
non-reverse, if they decided to protect the drawing). It is 
unlikely Tenniel used this method with the White Rabbit, 
however, as it appears too similar to all the other tracings 
in the set. 

22 In lieu of a kneaded rubber, Tenniel could have used 
a wad of bread—perfectly tacky. Art manuals even in 
his time recommended bread or “crumb of bread” for 
erasing, exactly what was used before the discovery of 
rubber. The earliest mention of a marketed kneaded 
rubber found for this article is from 1882, though it 
could be more than a century late. See, for example, 
Henry O’Neill, How to Use the Black Lead Pencil, Chalks, 
and Water Colours... (London: George Rowney, 1861), 
pp. 2, 3, 60; and Aaron Penley, A System of Water Color 
Painting..., (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1879, Thirty- 
Eighth London Edition), pp. 22, 32, 36, 44, and 52. Also 
see Aaron Penley, A System of Water Colour Painting: Book 
& Catalog (London: Winsor & Newton, 1882), p. 50. 

23 This explains why only one tracing per drawing ever 
appears to survive. If having a change of heart as to the 
orientation, Tenniel could either trace the backside 
from a window or do the “three generation” approach. 
The second generation is not considered collectible as 
it is too weak to be preserved and is either erased or 


Leaves piocn 
rbe Deaneny Ganden 

Thanks for unearthing the “new” 
Lewis Carroll anagram puzzle that 
appeared in KL 99:19. Ever ready 
to rise to a challenge, I was piqued 
by the Editor’s comment that no 
other answers had been found 
to the five challenges, to search 
instead for other challenges that 
could produce further anagram- 
matical answers from the same 
root (NOW, I THINK). I was sur¬ 
prised to find many options sur¬ 
facing, and I found the following 
ten new candidates with somewhat 
reasonable readings: 

What was Alice Liddell’s plea to 
Lewis Carroll after returning from 
the storytelling rowing trip? (INK 

How would Lewis Carroll describe 
himself if Twitter had been in¬ 
vented for writing poetry? (THIN 

What did the Sheep say when Alice 
asked her to include her kitten’s 
portrait in the knitting design? 

What did the Dodo say after “all 
must have prizes”? (THO’ KIN 

What did the Baker say about the 
Bellman’s physique? (I KNOW 

What was the secret rule for con¬ 
veying to the batters how to rig the 
croquet game? (HIT ON WINK) 

What did Tweedledee say to Twee¬ 
dledum in exasperation after the 
battle? (OH, TWIN KIN!) 

What did the up-and-coming head¬ 
line writer say he most liked to do? 

How did the Dutch Lullaby chil¬ 
dren in the Wooden Shoe spend 
the evening? (HOT WINKIN’) 

How do you play the flugelhorn 
game? (HONK IT, WIN) 

Christopher Tyler 


As your readers may know, Ever- 
type has published translations of 
Alice and Looking-Glass into more 
than 50 languages, with some 50 

more in various stages of progress. 
I recently received the text in 
Western Armenian (we have the 
book in Eastern Armenian), and 
recently I recruited a translator 
into Fife Scots. We’re consider¬ 
ing translations into Venetian 
and Akkadian, and are also in 
communication with a Quechua 
translator—so translation progress 

I am moving my publishing 
house from Ireland to Dundee, 
Scotland, to be near a professor 
at the university in Dundee who is 
working with me on Blissymbols, a 
pictorial language. I have a trans¬ 
lation of Alice into Blissymbols in 
process. The language has proven 
to be of great value for those af¬ 
flicted with cerebral palsy, allowing 
them to communicate. 

The reason for the move was to 
improve my quality of life. I need 
to live in a city, and the only one 
in Ireland that is of interest is far, 
far too expensive to live in. I have 
been working with the Blissymbol 


group for about 19 years, and 
some of my colleagues are here 
in Dundee. The whole project 
for translating Alice into Bliss also 
involves developing a typeface 
and getting Bliss encoded in Lim¬ 

it’s a Wonderland where everyone 
is Alice 

Where the ladies room is bigger 
than a palace, 

At the Roxy Music Hall . . . 

Rodgers and Hart, “At the Roxy 
Music Hall, ’’from I Married an 
Angel, 1938 


I myself had great difficulties with 
the letter C . . . Lewis Carroll, 
Joseph Conrad, Coleridge. 

Jeanette Winterson, Why Be 
Happy When You Could Be 
Normal?, Jonathan Cape, 2011 


The secondary literature on Car- 
roll and the Alice books—vast, and 
mostly more nonsensical than the 
stories themselves—tells us much 
about the commentators from 
generation to generation. Like¬ 
wise, commentators have found 
real-life, or rather real dead, hat¬ 
ters, who died as Victorian hatters 
tended to, of mercury poisoning 
—symptoms of which included 
rushing manically about stuffing 
bits of bread and butter in their 

A. N. Wilson, The Victorians, 

W. W. Norton & Company, 2003 

- ft - 

[It will be] a kind of wonder book 
a la Alice in Wonderland. Weary of 
Armageddon. I fled as far away 
from it as I could. You’ll find 
the sea in it. . . romantic galle¬ 
ons, wild dark coasts, enchanted 
surges, palaces on the ocean floor. 
Henry Beston, quoted in Daniel 
Payn’s Orion on the Dunes, A 
Biography of Henry Beston, 
David R. Godine, 2016. 

code. The Bliss translation could 
be used as part of a PhD thesis I 
could write, if we are able to find 
funding. (I don’t need a PhD for 
my career, but Bliss needs a thesis 
“proving” that Bliss is a proper 

- m - 

The special qualities of playfulness 
in [Alexander] Calder—his love of 
soft water and small wind, of the 
safe outdoors, of imaginary ani¬ 
mals easily tamed—belong to a dis¬ 
tinctive thread of modern art, the 
kind that William Empson, in his 
great discussion of childhood and 
play in the Alice books, called “the 
child as swain,” reanimating na¬ 
ture with unconscious poetic wis¬ 
dom more than with innocence. 
Adam Gopnik, ‘How Alexander 
Calder Made Art Move, ” The New 
Yorker, December 4, 201 7 

- ft - 

Lewis Carroll let you murder, 
bully, and impose your will system¬ 
atically on people, animals, land¬ 
scapes, and vocabularies. 

Margo Jefferson, Negroland: A 
Memoir, Pantheon Books, 2015 

- m - 

[Ralph Steadman] soldiered on, 
becoming unhinged in the way 
a great artist should be. He illus¬ 
trated the works of Lewis Carroll 
... in a death-head’s style that 
gave Tenniel and Rackham a 
run for the money; Steadman’s 
Cheshire cat wears what can fairly 
be described as an existentialist 
Werner Herzog smile. 

Warren Hinckle, Who Killed 
Hunter S. Thompson?, Last 
Gasp, 2017, describing why he 

language, to help it compete with 
less robust systems used by some 
disabled people.) 


Michael Everson 

(Hinckle) first thought of pairing 
Steadman and Thompson for an 
article for Scanlan’s Monthly 
magazine, June 1970, which gave 
birth to “gonzo ” and an immortal 

- m - 

Beware, however, the effect that 
covering Hollywood so ruthlessly 
can have on a journalist’s person¬ 
ality. [Gossip columnist Hedda] 
Hopper became so warped by it, 
she was tempted to call her mem¬ 
oirs Malice in Wonderland. 

Tim Stanley, ‘ Babylon’s 
Conscience: The Dying Art of 
Hollywood Gossip, And Why We 
Need It Now More Than Ever, ” 

The Telegraph (UK), March 15, 

- m - 

Modern equivalents [of deus ex 
machina] are the cavalry arriving, 
sundry accidents and diseases, or 
the heroine waking up to discover 
it was a dream. I can still remem¬ 
ber the shocked disappointment 
of reading Alice’s Adventures in 
Wonderland for the first time. Oh 
no! How could you do this to me, I 
wanted to cry. You can’t paint your 
character into a corner and then 
deny the existence of walls and 

Nigel Watts, Write a Novel and 
Get It Published, Teach Yourself, 


Alice was beginning to get very 
tired of all this sitting by herself 
with nothing to do: every so often 
she tried again to read the book in 
her lap, but it was made up almost 
exclusively of long paragraphs, 

4 1 

and no quotation marks whatso¬ 
ever, and what is the point of a 
book, thought Alice, that does not 
have any quotation marks? 

Lisa Halliday, opening lines of 
Asymmetry, Simon & Schuster, 

- X - 

A white rabbit carrying a pocket 
watch had woken Freddy up one 
morning by bemoaning his tardi¬ 
ness, and just yesterday, four chil¬ 
dren had turned up looking for a 
magic lion. 

Kari Maaren, Weave a Circle 
Round, A Tor Book, Tom Doherty 
Associates, New York, 201 7 

- m - 

Shopping [at AliExpress] feels like 
playing croquet with a flamingo 
or swimming in a pool filled with 
tears—bizarre but special. 

Alice Hines, ‘AliExpress, ” The 
New York Times Magazine, 

April 15, 2018 

- ft - 

“One sometimes got the impres¬ 
sion that the closing scene of the 
Mad Hatter’s tea party was being 
performed, with Louis in the role 
of the dormouse being stuffed into 
the teapot,” thought Hilton. 
Miranda Carter, Anthony Blunt: 
His Lives, Macmillan, 2001 

- m - 

As the weeks passed, the frumious 
language that his supporters used 
all sounded more and more like 
the outcry of people sure that they 
would be cheated of their due. 
Mark Wahlgren Summers, The 
Ordeal of the Reunion, UNC 
Press, 2014 

- M - 

The woman in the back seat was 
enormous; he couldn’t figure out 
how she had ever managed to get 
in. She was wrapped and swathed 
in shawls and she had on a hat 
which reminded him of the White 
Queen in Alice, only it was bigger. 
Walter R. Brooks, Freddy the Pilot, 
Alfred A. Knopf 1952 

- X - 

[Humpty Dumpty] had been wear¬ 
ing a tuxedo with a cravat—or 
cummerbund, it was impossible to 
say which. 

Jasper Fforde, The Big Over Easy: 
A Nursery Crime, Viking, 2005 

- x - 

Prosopagnosia is a rare form of 
visual agnosia characterised by 
impaired recognition of famil¬ 
iar faces (or equivalent stimuli). 

... [In Looking-glass,] Humpty 
Dumpty reports an inability to 
recognise a familiar face, yet is 
able to recognise eyes, nose, and 
mouth and their correct positions 
... Humpty Dumpty’s account 
seems to indicate preserved com- 
ponential but impaired configural 
processing. There is also a sugges¬ 
tion that Humpty Dumpty might 
be able to use extraneous informa¬ 
tion to assist in facial recognition, 
his example being two eyes on one 
side of the nose or the mouth at 
the top of the face. 

A. J. Lamer, ‘Lewis Carroll’s 
Humpty Dumpty: An Early Report 
of Prosopagnosia ? ”, Journal of 
Neurology, Neurosurgery, & 
Psychiatry, August 2004 

- x - 

The fantastic tale may suspend the 
laws of physics—carpets fly; cats 
fade into invisibility leaving only 
a smile—and of probability— the 
youngest of three brothers always 
wins the bride; the infant in the 
box cast upon the waters survives 
unharmed—but it carries its revolt 
against reality no further; Math¬ 
ematical order is unquestioned. 
Two and one make three, in Kos¬ 
chei’s castle and Alice’s Wonder¬ 
land (especially in Wonderland). 
Euclid’s geometry— or possibly 
Riemann’s—somebody’s geometry 
anyhow—governs the layout. Oth¬ 
erwise incoherence would invade 
and paralyze the narrative. 

Ursula K. LeGuin, At Doesn’t 
Have to Be the Way It Is,” No 
Time to Spare, Houghton Mifflin 
Harcourt, 2017 

- x - 

[We were in Nicaragua] in a sod¬ 
den little village of the delta called 
Barro de Colorado. This was 
beastly, the air was almost solid 
with insects, and we felt quite lost 
in the remote, desolate, sharky 
place. Joan and I found two horses 
and went for rides along the reefs 
between the jungle and the sharks, 
splashing through the inlets and 
longing for the spikes with which 
the White Knight equipped his 
charger’s fetlocks, indispensable 
for horsemen in these parts. 

Patrick Leigh Fermor, A Life in 
Letters, New York Review Books, 

- x - 

But she didn’t like being fixed 
up and straightened out, warning 
Brooks, “I am apt to use what may 
appear to be a curious inversion 
of words or phrases”—her brine- 
soaked jabberwocky—“but for 
the most part these are peculiar 
to my style and I don’t want them 

Jill Lepore, “The Right Way to 
Remember Rachel Carson, ” The 
New Yorker, March 26, 2018 

- M - 

To paraphrase the Mad Hatter, 
Americans eat what they see, and 
what they see is more likely to be 
a 140-character tweet than a two- 
thousand-word newspaper article. 
Susan Jacoby, The Age of 
American Unreason in a 
Culture of Lies, Pantheon, 2008 


“Well, I hope they will be very 
happy,” sighed Dum when we were 
discussing the matter while we lay 
on our closely packed cots the first 
night of Mr. Gordon’s visit. 

“It does seem terribly unroman¬ 
tic for the separation to have been 
caused by the Lobster Quadrille.” 

“It might have been a perma¬ 
nent separation if it had been just 
plain lobster, ’specially in cans,” 
said funny Mary Flannigan. 

Nell Speed, Vacation with the 
Tucker Twins, A. L. Burt, 1915 


- 31 - 

[Kenneth Grahame] not only 
continued to honour the obliga¬ 
tions imposed by the hierarchy 
of family and society, but in some 
sense actively needed them; and 
thus two powerful elements were 
permanently at conflict in him. 

He compromised: outwardly he 
conformed with his society. But his 
inner self took revenge in satire 
and fantasy: at first openly, then by 
more oblique and subtle methods. 
Like Lear and Carroll, he found re¬ 
lief in the world of childhood, the 
animal fable, the potent symbols. 

Peter Green, Kenneth Grahame, 

A Biography, John Murray, 1959 

- m - 

It is nonsensical, but calculated 
nonsense, a sort of Alice in Won¬ 
derland letter, never mere blather, 
but a work of stunning, charming, 
goofy intelligence. 

Lyanda Lynn Haupt, Mozart’s 
Starling, Little Brown, 2017 

- m - 

The naming of the yacht was not 
the least of our difficulties. Friends 
were prolific with Petrels and Sea 

Birds’, they even dared White Wings 
and Sea Wolves, not to mention 
Calls of the Wild. Jack [London] 
recalled Mr. Lewis Carroll’s The 
Hunting of the Snark, and held that 
name up as a warning induce¬ 
ment for better suggestions. Such 
were not forthcoming, and when 
we sailed for Hawaii, the elliptic 
American stern bore the gilded 


Charmian London, The Log of 
the Snark, Macmillan, 1915 

Christ Church holds three distinct 
collections of material relating to 
Lewis Carroll, aka Charles Lud- 
widge Dodgson. 

Splash page of (( The Lewis Carroll 
Collection ” digitization project at 
the Christ Church, Oxford, website 
(page 64). You’d think they, of all 
places on Earth, would know how 
to spell his middle name. (Since 


I invited her in and picked up 
the envelope. Inside, there was a 
card with an illustration from Alice 
through the Looking Glass and the 
words “non-WEDDING invitation” 
in embossed letters. 

Guillermo Martinez, The Oxford 
Murders, MacAdam/Cage, 2003 

- is - 

Besides its gently transcendent 
presence, the most astonishing 
thing about a Swainson’s Thrush 
is the male’s song. The Swainson’s 
Thrush sings in a swirling upward 
spiral, sings the sound that would 
accompany Alice as she falls 
through the looking glass, if she 
were falling up into Wonderland. 
Lyanda Lynn Haupt, Rare 
Encounters with Ordinary 
Birds, Sasquatch Books, Seattle, 

Hannah Becker- 
Thomas A. Costa 
Harry Greer 
Chloe Hamilton 
Peter Harris 
Markus Lang 

Susan D. Radovsky 
Dana Richards 
Clare Sherman 
Nicole B. Soboleski 
Jeffrey Thomas 
Maureen W. Vavra 

Mark Samuels Lasner 
Ron Maas 
Michael Miceli 


r jje V?t irin< * 


C ONGRATULATIONS to the Knight Letter on 
its 100 th issue! My birthday wish for it would 
be to be able to send a copy of this issue 
through a time portal to the founding members of 
the Society, so that they could see what they had set 
in motion back in 1974. Not that the transmogrifica¬ 
tion from a two-sheet newsletter to a sixty-plus page 
magazine would necessarily surprise them—it’s easy 
to imagine founding president 
Stan Marx just nodding and saying, 

“I knew that there was this much 
knowledge and energy out there 
among Carroll collectors, scholars, 
and enthusiasts—that’s why I start¬ 
ed the Society!” 

Even so, it is truly remarkable 
to have had such a quantity of in¬ 
formation and very high-quality 
work published over the past four decades. I can’t be¬ 
gin to feature here any particular few of the many im¬ 
portant articles that have seen the light of day thanks 
to the existence of the Knight Letter. The depth and 
breadth of Carroll studies would have looked very dif¬ 
ferent without it, or even if it had remained a brief 
newsletter. Similarly, the evolution of the meeting re¬ 
port to its present level of detail has given the Knight 
Letter an important role in fulfilling the mission of the 
LCSNA. Since presenting programs of talks is half of 
our raison d’etre , along with our scholarly publications 
such as the Pamphlets series, preserving these pro¬ 
grams in print is essential. 

Over its hundred issues, the Knight Letter has also 
published a wealth of otherwise ephemeral informa¬ 
tion about products, performances, publications, and 
all the endless manifestations of Carroll and Alice 
throughout the culture. That has meant that there 
was no need for a Society member to miss a funny car¬ 
toon, exhibition catalogue, or mention of Carroll on 
Jeopardy! at the time, but it also means that there’s now 
an accumulation of research material that would oth¬ 
erwise have been lost to anyone wanting to do work 
on Alice in advertising, fine porcelains, and perhaps 
other items undreamt of before browsing through 
the KL archive. 

One of those categories might be a meta-inter¬ 
est in the evolution of Carroll studies or even the 
Society itself. I was taken by surprise to see a notice 
from an issue exactly 25 years ago inviting people to 
join Joel Birenbaum’s Alice in Wonderland Collec¬ 
tors’ Network, including a physical address to send 
correspondence to. Not that I hadn’t known about 
it at the time—but now I see that very network, with 
its 11,000 members, sharing infor¬ 
mation whenever I glance at Face- 
book. Another serendipitous find 
is my own report in issue 33 on the 
1989 International Carroll Confer¬ 
ence at Christ Church, an example 
of the kind of key event in the build¬ 
ing of the Carroll community that 
the Knight Letter has captured (plus 
a personal happy memory), even 
without the extra layer of having had USC-meeting 
speaker Linda Gray-Moin show a photo from that 
conference in her talk this past spring, and credit it 
as the beginning of her own Carroll pursuits. 

So, hail to the Knight Letter , and to its many 
hard-working editors and section editors, past and 
present! An outstanding way to celebrate would be 
to do what I just did, which is to dip into the digi¬ 
tized archive (link on the KL page of our 
website) and enjoy stumbling upon 
treasures large and small. Whether 
you’ve been in the LCSNA for 
years and get 
down memory 
lane or you’ve 
joined more 
recently and ev¬ 
erything in the 
back issues is new to 
you, I guarantee 
you a festive jaunt. 

(All right, one 
more blast from the 
past: In 1978, then-pres¬ 
ident Peter Heath recom¬ 
mended some “beautifully 


made” rubber stamps as “instant attention-getters and great 
fun to use on correspondence”and gave the full mailing ad¬ 
dress member of Andrew Ogus, who was then working in a 
bookstore that sold them. Longer-time Carrollians now 
have a big smile, imagining the improbable image of 
Peter Heath enjoying stamping his letters, as well as 
rejoicing in this off-hand mention forty years ago of 
our wonderful current KL designer, Andrew Ogus.) 

As always, I will close this column by looking for¬ 
ward. The next meeting is coming up sooner than 
usual, on September 22, to coincide with an exhibi¬ 
tion at the Morgan Library and Museum in New York. 
The Society has met at and visited the Morgan over 
the decades of our existence, because of its outstand¬ 
ing Carroll holdings—I hope you were able to see 
their Alice 150 show in 2015. This, however, is some¬ 
thing else entirely. We will be meeting on the clos¬ 
ing weekend of their Medieval Monsters exhibition, 
which became an inspirational bridge to thinking 
about monsters in the worlds of Lewis Carroll. Who in 
Wonderland and Looking-Glass Land isn 7 a monster 
in some sense? What about the Snark? Don’t forget 

the poor little ghost of Phantasmagoria). It suddenly 
seems hard to consider Carroll without talking about 
what it means to confront monsters—creatures who 
aren’t human yet demand to be regarded as persons, 
fantastical beasts who may not believe in us, alien 
strangers who mirror and mock us. Among our ex¬ 
pected speakers are noted children’s literature expert 
Michael Patrick Hearn, New Yorker staff writer and cul¬ 
tural commentator Adam Gopnik, educator Cindy 
Watter on Phantasmagoria , and scholar Matt Demakos 
on the Jabberwock. The day’s events are currently 
in development, so make your travel plans now and 
keep checking our website and social media for up-to- 
date details on speakers and details. Looking forward 
to seeing many, many of you there—and although a 
hundred issues of the Knight Letter constitute a truly 
monumental representation of forty-four years of the 
LCSNA, there’s nothing like spending the day with 
other Carrollians. If you’ve never done that, then this 
will be a fine meeting to be reminiscing about in de¬ 
cades to come as having been your first! 

''‘Speedburvip" by t>ave Poverty, February lo, golds' 






I n our last episode, we talked at length 
about movie posters—domestic movie 
posters. Let’s now travel the world and visit 
the amazing, colorful, and frustrating category of 
foreign movie posters. As mentioned last time, here 
in the U.S., the vast majority of movie posters were 
distributed by National Screen Service, an indepen¬ 
dent distribution company that managed all movie 
promotional material for nearly 60 years, bringing 
order from chaos and standardizing poster sizes. Oh, 
how the foreign poster collector longs for something 
like that. But there is hope: there are many online re¬ 
sources that provide lots of information on the sizes, 
shapes, and names of the multitude of foreign post¬ 
ers. But they ain’t perfect. Three good examples are 
Learn About Movie Posters, Cinemasterpieces, and 

Let’s begin our journey in jolly old England, shall 
we? After all, that’s where Alice is from! I have very 
little information on the original material from Eng¬ 
land, since, for whatever reason, original British Dis¬ 
ney Alice material is very difficult to come by. But I do 
know that the posters themselves come in two fairly 
standard sizes: the quad and the double crown. There 
are other sizes, much rarer sizes—but these two are 
usually made for every release. A quad is similar to a 

U.S. 1-sheet, approximately 30"x40", but in 
landscape orientation rather than portrait. 
I’ve only ever seen one in my life, and it was 
sold in the UK a few years back, without my even 
knowing about it at the time. The double crown, a 
smaller portrait poster, is 20"x30". I’ve never seen 
one. The English also have a version of lobby cards— 
what they call Front of House cards—which are the 
size of a U.S. still photo, approximately 8"xl0". The 
Alice set contains a total of eight FOH cards. 

Moving across the channel to France, I am famil¬ 
iar with two sizes again: the petite affichette , which is 
approximately 23"x31" in size, and the grande affiche , 
which is approximately 47"x63". I have seen three in 
total of these sizes, one style of petite and two different 
styles of grande. Again, there are other rarer sizes, but 
I have never come across any to date. What is interest¬ 
ing about the petite is that it is by a fairly well-known 
European poster artist, Boris Grinsson, and that this 
exact art is used in the German poster called an A1 
(that’s way easier to remember). The only difference 
from the French petite (other than the language) is 
the size, with the A1 being 23"x33", so only a little 
taller. All the other German sizes are similarly named 
(A2, A3, AO, etc.), but I’ve never seen any. 

English Front of House (FOH) cards 


Continuing our haphazard journey across Eu¬ 
rope takes us to Italy. Italy made some of the most 
beautiful movie posters for the Alice release, in my 
very personal opinion. Let’s start with the fotobusta 
(sometimes anglicized as photobusta). These are like 
large lobby cards or small half-sheets. Over the years 
their size has changed, but at the time of the original 
Alice release, they were approximately 14"x20", and 
the Alice set has a total of 12, of which I’ve seen 11. 

There also exists another size, supposedly from 
later decades, but of which I’ve seen two styles. Since 
they seem to be an anomaly, I have given them my 
own name: jumbo fotobusta. In the late 1950s the 
size increased to 18"x26", and these two are that size, 
but they are clearly from the initial release, so I don’t 
know what else to call them. But they are pretty! 

There are more traditionally sized Italian posters 
too. The counterpart to our 1-sheet is called a 2-fogli 
and is 39"x55". 

There are also foglio (smaller at 28"x39") and 4 -fo- 
gli (55"x78"), but those are less common although I 

have seen a 4 -fogli, and it is probably my favorite post¬ 
er of all—I wish I owned it. 

Continuing our trip through Europe, I have 
seen posters from Spain, the former Czechoslovakia, 
Denmark, Sweden (in 3 sizes), Poland, Belgium, and 

Outside of Europe, I have seen posters from Aus¬ 
tralia, Argentina, and Japan. The Australian poster 
(called a daybill) resembles our figure. There are 
bound to be others, as the world is vast. Most coun¬ 
tries that produced posters also produced heralds, 
but that topic is for another time. 

Most of the foreign posters in our collection are 
currently on display in the ACMI (Australian Centre 
for the Moving Image) Wonderland exhibition in 
Melbourne, Australia, through October 7, 2018, and 
were previously on display at the Geppi Exhibition in 
2016-2017 in Baltimore, MD. For more images and 
details on posters mentioned here, visit vintagedis 

Clockwise from 
upper left: 
French Petite 
Afpchette, Ital¬ 
ian 4-fogli, Ger¬ 
man Al, Polish 
poster, Italian 
Jumbo Foto¬ 
busta style B 


Arcane Illustrators: 


Jan Svankmajer 



hat? Svankmajer “arcane”? Didn’t he 
do one of the greatest of all Wonderland 
films, 1988’s darkly lovely Neco z Alenky, 
aka Alice? Well, yes, but did you know he also illustrat¬ 
ed both Alice books in 2006 with his surreal drawings 
and collages? Probably not, as they were only pub¬ 
lished with the text in Japanese, 1 not even in Czech as 
one might presume. Besides, it is not altogether inap¬ 
propriate to use the adjective “arcane” (mysterious, 
obscure, esoteric) when speaking about his oeuvre. 

Svankmajer is a creative artist in many media. 
Born in Prague in 1934, his first childhood love was 
puppetry, which he later studied at the Academy 
of Performing Arts in Prague ( Akademie muzickych 
um m v Praze , AMU). He then worked professionally 
at various multimedia theaters, eventually founding 
the short-lived Theater of Masks ( Divadlo masek). 
From around 1968 on, he became a dedicated sur¬ 
realist, joining the Czechoslovakian Surrealist Group 
(Skupina surrealistic v CSR). His art was by and large 
suppressed by the Soviets beginning with their take¬ 
over in 1968 and only became widely known—mainly 
on the basis of his films—after the fall of the Soviet 
Union in 1991. 

He was married to Eva Svankmajerova, nee 
Dvorakova, a surrealist painter, ceramicist, and writer 
who worked with him on several of his movies, including 
art-directing Alice and making three lovely posters for it. 
Before her death in 2005, they collaborated on a Car- 
rollian exhibition for Japan, Alice or Pleasure Principle, 
which took place in 2007. 2 

Aside from his cinematic work, 3 Svankmajer is to 
this day a serious visual artist, making ceramics, col¬ 
lages, assemblages of found material, sculpture, etch¬ 
ings, drawings, poems, taxidermic objets d’art, and 
Kunstkammern (cabinets of curiosities). These endeav¬ 
ors are well documented in Gerald Matt’s book The 
Universe of Jan Svankmajer. 

Svankmajer’s wildly entertaining, most unusual 
Alice illustrations are in a world of their own. Here’s 
Adriana’s take, from her “Alicedelic Collages: Pic¬ 
tures in Conversation” talk at the “Illustrating Alice” 
symposium at the Alice 150 gathering in 2015: 

Jan Svankmajer illustrated Alice’s adventures 

through pictures in conversation that reinvent 

the worlds imagined by Lewis Carroll with a 
freedom to propose their own puzzles and 
paradoxes. We travel with Alice in an imaginary 
forest where things lose their commonsense 
names. There we meet chimeras and composite 
creatures in collages and drawings that have 
hybrid identities emerging from underground, 
archaic, and strange worlds. Alice’s body meta¬ 
morphoses between found imagery of biology 
and botany, mutating cells, dolls, Victorian illus¬ 
trations, Japanese iconography, Czech puppetry, 
toys, games, sexual symbols, and other curiosi¬ 
ties from a very arcane cabinet of wonders. 

Portmanteaux produce displacements and 
unusual associations, and in Looking-Glass, lin¬ 
guistic experiments inhabit toves, mome raths, 
borogoves, bread-and-butterflies. Assembled 
words challenge assembled monsters, enigmatic 
beings composed of different species, in a 
phantasmagoria of textures, fragmentations, jux¬ 
tapositions, and unexpected surrealist encoun¬ 
ters. When the caterpillar asks, “Who are you?” 
Svankmajer multiplies Alices which invite us to 
adventure in inexhaustible dreams, always dar¬ 
ing the impossible. “Ah, that’s the great puzzle!” 

Svankmajer’s introduction, translated from his hand¬ 
written Czech note reproduced in the Japanese edi¬ 
tions, is as follows: 

Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland is one of the 
key works that our civilization has produced. 

It is one of the books you have to have on a 
desert island to survive. Dozens of genera¬ 
tions of children with no firm grounding have 
been brought up on it. And I am no exception. 
Furthermore, it is not just a children’s book. 

On the contrary: it offers proof that there is no 
such thing as specific “art for children”—that is 
just a retail trick. We can only guess and argue 
whether this or that book (or picture or film) 
is suitable for children or not. Lewis Carroll’s 
Alice in Wonderland can be read aany age, and 
it will always be a book that is “different.” After 
all, we have dreams throughout our lives. Lewis 
Carroll’s books about Alice are not fairy tales— 

4 s 

they are dreams. There is a major difference 
between dreams and fairy tales. Fairy tales have 
an educational aspect, to a lesser or greater 
extent, but there are no morals to dreams—they 
are a pure “wonderland” of freedom. They 
have their own logic, but do not respect any 
rational rules. And that is exactly how Lewis 
Carroll wrote his books. I have been striving to 
measure up to that inspiration all my life. The 
films Jabberwocky [1971], Do shlepa (“Down to the 
Cellar” [1983]), 5 and NecozAlenky, (“Alice”) 
and now the illustrations for the book have 
given me a canvas on which to attempt that. 

I have also tried to pay tribute in my illus¬ 
trations to John Tenniel, the first illustrator of 
Lewis Carroll’s books. I have used some of his 
motifs, but I have also “quoted” directly from 
him, especially in the introductory black-and- 
white drawings. I feel that Tenniel’s illustra¬ 
tions fit hand in glove with Carroll’s text. 

The way I constantly return to Alice shows 
how the books offer me inexhaustible inspira¬ 
tion (as does childhood in general for that 
matter), but also because none of my creations 
has fully satisfied me. That goes for these il¬ 
lustrations too. One of these days I am going 
to have to make myself some time, sit down 
with my pencil and start all over again. 6 

When one thinks of prominent Czech A lice illustrators, 
the name Marketa Prachaticka usually comes to mind 
(Dusan Kallay being Slovak). Her book came out in 
German (Illgner, 1982), Czech (Albatros, 1983), and 
English (Wellington, 1989). Would that some enlight¬ 
ened publisher would issue Svankmajer’s work in an 
English-language edition! 

[Sometimes wishes do come true. Very recently, Athanor 
has done exactly that, and all copies bought from them are 
signed by Jan. They also sell the three Eva Svankmajerova 
posters of his Alice in Czech, German, and English; the 
book Jan Svankmajer by Bruno Solar ik (bilingual: Czech/ 
English), signed by Jan; the DVD o/Neco z Ale nky {in 
Czech, with English and French subtitles); his other films 
and posters; etchings; and many other delights. Visit www., aka svankmajerjan.coml ] 


1 'F/qaISO [Ml O l 7 U X [Arisu in Wonderland], published 
by Esquire Magazine Japan in 2006, has an ISBN of 978- 
4872951059; a 2011 reprint by Kokusho Kankokai, 978- 
4336053466; Esquire’s companion volume WzCDSOj 7 U 
X [Arisu in Looking-Glass Land] is 978-4872951073; the 
2011 Kankokai reprint 978-4336053473. 

2 The catalog was published by Esquire Japan, ISBN 978- 

3 See his illuminating essay “Alice in Film” in Illustrating 
Alice (Artists’ Choice, 2013). 

4 Bilingual (German and English) edition (Verlag fur 
moderne Kunst, 2016). 

5 Both viewable on YouTube. 

6 Translation by Tomedes Smart Human Translation, here 
published in English for the first time, with the kind 
permission and approval of Jan Svankmajer. 

- m - 


English actress Camilla Power, born in Ireland in 
1976, was the uncredited voice of Alice in the Eng¬ 
lish version of Svankmajer’s film. Twelve at that time, 
she has gone on to a long career in British television, 
lasting to this day. 


3ti iffilcmonam 

David H. Schaefer 

LCSNA Founding Member (Sr’Former President 
September 17, 1924 —January 14, 2018 

Remembered by 
August A. Imholtz,Jr. 

D avid Schaefer, a friend 
of over four decades to 
Clare and myself, as well 
as to so many members of our So¬ 
ciety, passed away at the age of 93 
in his home in Silver Spring, Mary¬ 
land. He had suffered a massive 
stroke on New Year’s Day, and it is a 
fitting coincidence that David died 
on the same date as did Lewis Carroll, the au¬ 
thor to whom he devoted so much of his life. 

The Schaefer Collection began in 1892 
when David’s mother, Mabel Hutzler, received, 
on her sixth birthday, a copy of Through the Look¬ 
ing-Glass. This became the nucleus of the Schae¬ 
fer Collection, which is surely the oldest con¬ 
tinuous collection of Carrolliana held in private 
hands except for those of the Dodgson descen¬ 
dants. David’s maternal grandfather owned the 
largest department store in Baltimore, Hut¬ 
zler’s, founded in 1858, and on his buying trips 
to Europe he often picked up foreign-language 
editions of the Alice books for his daughter. Af¬ 
ter David’s parents died, he inherited the col¬ 
lection, and his wife, Maxine, even bought a 
Spanish Alice on their honeymoon in Mexico. 
In addition to their collection of books, how¬ 
ever, David and Maxine amassed the finest and 
most complete collection of Alice films, begin¬ 
ning with the 1903 ten-minute Cecil Hepworth 
silent movie. 

In 1982 David and Maxine traveled to Lon¬ 
don to join Anne Clark, Dodgson family mem¬ 
bers, and representatives of the British Lewis 
Carroll Society for the December 17th unveil¬ 
ing of the Lewis Carroll Memorial Stone in 
Poet’s Corner in the south transept of Westmin¬ 
ster Abbey. With Maxine and, after her death, 
with his second wife, Mary, David visited Eng¬ 

land many times on pilgrimage to 
many Carroll sites, most recently 
to the location of the original Hep- 
worth studios. Here in the United 
States, David cohosted three LC¬ 
SNA semiannual meetings in the 
Washington, D.C. area, and over 
the years gave a number of talks 
on and showings of the Alice films 
at our meetings, at the Smithsonian Institu¬ 
tion, and at the University of Maryland. David 
and Mary organized our 2009 LCSNA meeting 
in Fort Lee, New Jersey, which had been the 
American movie capital before Hollywood be¬ 
came Hollywood (KL 83:5). 

After Maxine died in October of 1996, Da¬ 
vid set up the Maxine Schaefer Memorial Out¬ 
reach Program to honor her and simultaneous¬ 
ly to do something for children. For Maxine, 
who had diligently served as the Society’s sec¬ 
retary for twenty years, had often lamented that 
there were never any children involved in this 
Society dedicated to the world’s foremost chil¬ 
dren’s author. The “something” became a dra¬ 
matic reading of a chapter, usually “The Mad 
Tea Party,” for a class of schoolchildren, often 
third or fourth graders, in the cities where we 
met for our semiannual gatherings. Each of the 
children receives a copy of an Alice book with 
a bookplate honoring Maxine. David discussed 
highlights of the past twenty years of readings 
in an illustrated talk at our Fall 2017 meeting at 
the University of Delaware. 

The story of how David and Maxine be¬ 
came founding members of the Society is one 
of almost Carrollian indirection. It all started 
on January 9, 1972, with the Indiana patholo¬ 
gist Dr. Lall Montgomery, when he wrote to 
Stan Marx: “I am reminded that I have just had 

5 ° 

a note from a chap who turned up as a fellow 
collector through a mutual friend at a recent 
meeting.” The chap, who lived in Silver Spring, 
Maryland, was of course David Schaefer. The 
“friend” was David’s cousin George, also a pa¬ 
thologist. Dr. Montgomery then sent David and 
Maxine the name and address of Anne Clark, 
cofounder of the (at that time, still relatively 
new) Lewis Carroll Society in England. In 1973, 
the Schaefers traveled to London, where they 
met Anne Clark and other members of the Brit¬ 
ish Society, and learned about Stan Marx, an 
advertising executive and Carroll collector on 
Long Island, who was trying to establish a sister 
society in America. David and Maxine visited 
Stan and Diana Marx later that year and be¬ 
came part of the small working group of Carroll 
collectors and enthusiasts who wanted to form a 
satellite of the British Society—until Arthur A. 
Houghton Jr. disabused them of that idea. And 
so at a meeting on January 12-13, 1974, at Princ¬ 
eton University, the independent Lewis Carroll 
Society of North America was founded. 

As much as David liked the two Alice books 
and, of course, The Hunting of the Snark, it was 
Carroll’s Symbolic Logic that fascinated him and 
led to his lifelong career in computers. After 
completing a degree in physics at Tulane Uni¬ 
versity in New Orleans, David joined the Naval 
Research Laboratory in 1949. Four years later, 
at his insistence, he was assigned to Project Van¬ 
guard—the first American satellite effort. The 
head of the project visited David’s team one day 
and told them, “We need a telemetry system 
that weighs less than four pounds.” David and 
his group said, “We can make that”; they waited 
until the director left the room and then ran to 
the dictionary to look up the word “telemetry.” 
Not only did they produce it, but it weighed less 
than eight ounces and used so little current that 
it did not need to be turned off. Many satellite 
successes followed, urged on by President Eisen¬ 
hower’s determined response to the Soviets’ 
Sputnik 1. 

David and his team produced the first in¬ 
tegrated circuit in space. The backup of their 
Vanguard 3 satellite now hangs in NASA’s God¬ 
dard Space Center, while the actual satellite is 
still in orbit. Data from David’s team’s Explorer 
1 and Explorer 3 satellites, or the lack thereof, 
provided the evidence for earth’s radiation 

belts, discovered byjames Van Allen. David con¬ 
ceived and developed two-dimensional optical 
logic for the Landsat program, and then came 
the construction of massively parallel process¬ 
ing computers, and much more. After leaving 
NASA in 1981, David spent fifteen years as pro¬ 
fessor of computer science at George Mason 
University in Northern Virginia, continuing to 
serve there as an emeritus associate professor 
after his retirement in 1996. He was the author 
or co-author of over thirty journal and proceed¬ 
ings papers, had articles in seven books, and was 
awarded twelve patents for computer-related in¬ 

In the field of Carroll scholarship, the 
chapter David and Maxine wrote on the Alice 
films, “The Film Collector’s Alice” published in 
Lewis Carroll Observed , edited by Edward Guilia- 
no (New York: Clarkson N. Potter, 1976), has 
never been surpassed, and continually updated 
versions of its checklist grace the various later 
incarnations of The Annotated Alice. David and 
Maxine produced The Tale of the Mouse’s Tail 
(Mica, 1995), and David and Mary wrote Where 
Did You Change? A Light Look at Bathing Machines 
(Mica, 2006). 

In recent years, David began to apply for a 
patent for the software he and his son Ed were 
designing to convert the black and white im¬ 
ages of silent films, especially the 1903 Cecil 
Hepworth Alice film, to sound. The software was 
used in certain segments of the double-DVD set 
he produced that was our 2016 Membership 
Premium, Alice’s Film Adventures Before 1932. 

At the January 16th memorial service for 
David at Temple Emanuel in Silver Spring, fol¬ 
lowing several psalms in Hebrew and English 
and reminiscences by family members, the can¬ 
tor noted that since David was a nonbeliever, 
she preferred to conclude by selecting some¬ 
thing from Lewis Carroll instead of saying the 
Kel Maleh Rachamim or other prayer. She read 
that famous excerpt from Carroll’s November 
13, 1890, letter to Ellen Terry, who had been giv¬ 
ing acting lessons to the child actress Isa Bow¬ 
man: “And so you have found out that secret— 
one of the deepest secrets of life—that all, that 
is really worth doing, is what we do for others.” 
That was true of Lewis Carroll, and also true of 
David Hutzler Schaefer. 

5 1 


Daniel Rover Singer 

Musicals are notoriously difficult 
to write. It’s nearly impossible to 
create a perfectly organic com¬ 
bination of story and songs that 
successfully whisks audiences into 
a suspension of disbelief. And a 
good musical about Lewis Carroll 
is highly improbable, given that 
his life hardly lends itself to the 

However, the young team of 
Cristian Guerrero and Chan¬ 
dler Patton (writers) and Steven 
Schmidt (composer), creators of 
a musical entitled Mad World , won 
over a skeptical audience of Car- 
rollians with a one-hour condensa¬ 
tion of their award-winning show. 

Performing concert-style (read¬ 
ing at music stands) with live key¬ 
board accompaniment by the com¬ 
poser, as well as a drummer, the 
show’s creators (Cristian Guerrero 
as Becker, Chandler Patton as Mrs. 
Lorina Liddell, Steven Schmidt 
as one of the choral singers) 
performed alongside a talented 
ensemble: Andrew Ceglio (Dodg- 
son), Madison Davenport (Alice), 
Kendra Schmidt (Alice’s sister 
Lorina, aka “Ina”), Trent Rowland 
(Tenniel/Suitor), Natasha Still 
(Edith), Fox Smith (Harry), Dan¬ 
iel Stewart (Henry Liddell), and 
Kaytie Holt (chorus). Last-minute 
casting difficulties led to Cristian 
portraying Florence Becker; the 
gender switch was something we 
easily adjusted to. 

Together they enacted a story 
of biographer Florence Becker 
(later Lennon), who shows up at 
the aged Liddell sisters’ auction of 
precious personal items (includ¬ 
ing the Under Ground manuscript) 
in 1929, fiercely determined to 
meet the Liddells in order to 
discover the truth about Lewis 
Carroll. Alice’s sister Ina initially 
refuses to be interviewed, but 
finally relents; as she reminisces, 
we are whisked back to the 1860s, 

Cmollkn Notes 

where we are shown how an ec¬ 
centric math teacher befriends the 
four children of his boss, invents 
a story to amuse them, and then 
jeopardizes both his career and his 
relationship with his boss’s family 
by publishing it. 

In order to develop the plot 
in a manner that gives the show’s 
composer something to write 
songs about, the writers have 
imagined a plausible emotional 
storyline in which Dodgson and 
Alice’s older sister Ina fall in love. 
It’s historically improbable, but as 
we watched their well-rehearsed, 
confident, and profoundly earnest 
presentation, it was easy to dismiss 
what we agree are the likely facts 
about Dodgson’s relationship with 
the Liddell family, and appreci¬ 
ate the lovely singing and mature 
storytelling, in which Dodgson be¬ 
comes an unlikely romantic hero. 

[When Karoline Leach first proposed a 
Dodgson romance with Lorina Liddell, 
it was in fact Alice’s older sister she 
was referring to. Later she changed her 
mind and decided it was the identi¬ 
cally named mother, and published her 
speculations in her 1999 book In the 
Shadow of the Dreamchild. - MB] 

The songs in Mad World are 
modern, lilting tone-poems that 
cut directly to the emotional core 
of the situation. While extremely 
pretty and emotionally on-point, 
this kind of sung communica¬ 
tion of feelings is decidedly un- 
Victorian. The libretto is also 
not terribly accurate to the time 
period—there are several jarringly 
modern words and phrases, and 

there is far too much casual use of 
first names—but this has become 
largely forgivable since shows 
like Hamilton and movies like The 
Greatest Showman have proven the 
appeal of modern twists given to 
historical subjects. It doesn’t seem 
out of step for Mad World to tell its 
story in a contemporary style while 
working hard to be generally re¬ 
spectful of history. It may be ran¬ 
kling the first time you hear the 
children call CLD “Uncle Charlie,” 
but after a few repetitions, one real¬ 
izes the genuine affection it implies, 
and most will let go of the inclina¬ 
tion to bristle at such a faux pas. 

[In subsequent correspondence I had 
with the writers, they happily agreed to 
have little Alice call him ‘ Mr. Dodg¬ 
son” throughout, if another production 
is forthcoming. ] 

The writers do inject many Car- 
rollian phrases into the dialogue 
(the 1951 Disney cartoon is also 
a source of dialogue, unnecessar¬ 
ily) , giving the show a brisk, witty 
flair, but overall, the tone is that 
of a wistful romantic drama, which 
left us misty-eyed at the end. Mad 
World is a mature, imaginative, 
insightful attempt to bring fresh 
perspective to a mystery whose so¬ 
lution we’d all like to know. While 
getting it to Broadway may be a 
“tough sell,” we wish these bright 
collaborators much success with 
this and all their future creative 

/Mad World was first performed at 
the Beverly Hills Playhouse in 2011, 
when Cristian and Steven were still 
in high school! There have been fully 
staged productions at Ball State Uni¬ 
versity (Muncie, Indiana) in 2015, 
where it won first place at the Discovery 
New Musical Festival, and at the Ken¬ 
nedy Center American College Theatre 
Festival (Milwaukee, Wisconsin) in 
2016, where it was named ‘Most Out¬ 
standing New Work in the Country. ” It 
also received a special one-time Charles 
Dodgson Award (a $10,000 grant) 
from the Wonderland Awards at USC.] 


- M - 


Linda Cassady 

During the spring 2018 LCSNA 
meeting, the display cases 
throughout Doheny Memorial 
Library were filled with fourteen 
years of striking art, art installa¬ 
tions, fashion, games, and stories 
from hundreds of University of 
Southern California (USC) and 
other Southern California Uni¬ 
versity students who reimagined, 
reinterpreted, and remixed Car- 
roll’s stories. The Wonderland 
Award is an annual multidisci¬ 
plinary competition that encour¬ 
ages new scholarship and creative 
work related to Lewis Carroll, with 
a goal of promoting the use of the 
Cassady Lewis Carroll Collection 
held at Doheny 

Members and guests of the 
Society and USC students and 
faculty viewed student submissions 
on April 13, 2018, and attended 
the announcement of winners, at 
which students give a summary of 
their work. USC Libraries hosted 
a reception following the ceremo¬ 
nies, which allowed the Wonder¬ 
land Award students and guests 
to mingle and enjoy the Southern 
California evening in the Nazarian 
Pavilion courtyard. 

This year, students created new 
interpretations and incarnations 
of Alice, which included film, stop 

action animation, original music, 
short fiction, annotated fiction, 
art and art objects, and a descrip¬ 
tive essay using Wonderland as a 
place to promote new ideas and 
concepts for architectural design. 
Entries were judged by Clare Im- 
holtz, Carrollian scholar; Peter 
Hanff, deputy director of the 
Bancroft Library at the University 
of California, Berkeley; Molly 
Bendall, poet and USC Professor 
of English; Lisa Mann, USC Pro¬ 
fessor of Cinematic Arts; Kelsey 
Rice, 1 st Place Wonderland Award 
winner, 2016, for an augmented 
reality book/game, What Is It But 
A Dream; and Linda Cassady. Each 
submission is judged on Quality, 
Carrollian Spirit, Originality, and 
an accompanying Artist Statement. 
The judges met in person for a 
final view and discussion of the 
work. All student information is 
anonymous in the review process. 
As happens, this year’s final review 
required an entire afternoon of 
joy and angst to determine the 

Justice Shellan, a USC senior 
majoring in English earned the 1 st 
Prize ($3,000) for his annotated 
short story “Roklif,” featuring a 
protagonist who embarks on a 
fanciful journey of discovery that 
mirrors that of the titular charac¬ 
ter in the two Alice books. Read the 
piece first without the annotations, 
and then find a different world 

Wonderland Award judges and winners (L to R): Kelsey Rice, Clare Imholtz, Maria Jose 
Montero, Alexander Aprahamian, Justice Shellan, Molly Bendall, Linda Cassady, 

Lisa Mann, Peter Hanff 

when re-reading with the annota¬ 
tions. Roklif’s name derives from 
the Norse words Ragnarok (“the 
doom of the gods”) and ^/(mean¬ 
ing “life”). The story is heavily 
annotated throughout with refer¬ 
ences to the imaginative puns and 
themes conjured by Lewis Carroll. 

When Shellan accepted the 
award, he said, “In this collection, 

I saw the inspiration one artist can 
have on all generations that follow 
him. I saw what it means to impact 
the creative voices of others. I saw, 
in that room, my greatest dream as 
a writer.” 

Second Prize ($1500) went to 
Cinematic Arts student Alexander 
Aprahamian for his work Chess 
Film ( 
This short work, of stunning qual¬ 
ity and impact, is inspired both 
by Ingmar Bergman’s classic The 
Seventh Seal and the overarching 
chess motif in Carroll’s Through 
the Looking-Glass , and reflects on 
the age-old philosophical question 
of free will vs. determinism. Mak¬ 
ing the film required a number 
of skills and steps: discovering 
Carroll, writing the treatment, 
learning chess, choreographing a 
chess game, finding and rehears¬ 
ing actors, filming, editing, and 
designing sound. 

The Bellman’s Prize ($500) 
was established this year by Dean 
Catherine Quinlan of the USC 
Libraries and named after one 
of the characters (the Bellman) 
in Carroll’s nonsense poem The 
Hunting of the Snark. It is given 
to the student who best uses the 
blank Ocean Map—think creative 
risk taking, doing something dif¬ 
ferent—in her or his Wonderland 
Award adventure. This prize went 
to Maria Jose Montero, a senior 
student, for her beautifully con¬ 
ceived and illustrated nonfiction 
submission, Learning from Wonder¬ 
land. The descriptive design work 
examines contemporary architec¬ 
ture practices through the prism 
of Carroll’s literary creations, and 


answers the question, “What can 
architecture learn from Alice in 
Wonderland, ?” The Bellman’s Prize 
recognizes particularly creative 
risk-taking or maybe a project that 
tried to find a Snark and may have 
found a Boojum. 

Note: First Prize is funded by 
an anonymous donor through 
the Lewis Carroll Society of North 
America. Amy Plummer and Linda 
Cassady provided LCSNA mem¬ 
berships to all students submitting 
work to the Wonderland Award. 

- m - 


Cecil Adams, of The Straight Dope 
column, books, and website, was 
informed by a reader, “In Christo¬ 
pher Whitcomb’s book Cold Zero: 
Inside the FBI Hostage Rescue Team 
[Little, Brown, 2001)], he men¬ 
tions that one of the questions in a 
test determining suitability for the 
FBI was if the applicant had read 
Alice in Wonderland ,” and was asked 
to explain it. Cecil’s reply (in part): 

Let’s clear up one thing off the 
bat: the question isn’t whether 
you’ve read Alice in Wonderland , 
it’s whether you liked it. (To be 
precise, you’re supposed to re¬ 
spond true or false to some vari¬ 
ant of the statement “I enjoyed 
reading Alice in Wonderland.”) 

This slightly sinister query was in 
the original edition of the Min¬ 
nesota Multiphasic Personality 
Inventory (MMPI), a well-known 
personality test commonly, if 
inappropriately, administered to 
job applicants. It was dropped 
from a newer version of the test, 
MMPI-2, which was published in 
1989, but still appears in another 
test, the California Psychological 
Inventory (CPI). Your paranoia 
about such things is understand¬ 
able—what’s a question like that 
supposed to gauge? Whether you 
like fantasy? Hookah smoking? 
Little girls? 

I’ve gotten several answers. 
William Poundstone in Bigger 

Secrets [Houghton Mifflin, 1986] 
writes that, on the MMPI, “Liking 
the story suggests femininity in a 
man; disliking it suggests mas¬ 
culinity in a woman.” However, 
retired University of Minne¬ 
sota psychology professor James 
Butcher, one of the prime movers 
behind MMPI-2 and somebody 
who ought to know, tells me the 
Alice question was experimental 
and never measured anything. 
Possibly Poundstone got the 
MMPI and the CPI mixed up—a 
spokesman for the company pub¬ 
lishing the latter says the answer 
among other things contributes 
to the “femininity/masculinity” 
scale, which measures “sensitivity 
vs. action.” An element of sen¬ 
sitivity is an interest in the arts, 
presumably including literature, 
hence Alice. Does answering 
“true” make you too sensitive to 
be a cop? Not to worry. Dozens 
of items contribute to the F/M 
scale, giving you ample opportu¬ 
nity to demonstrate you’re butch. 



“Let me first tell you that I know 
your name quite well, not as col¬ 
umnist of Scientific American , but 
as the writer of The Annotated Alice. 
Prof. Coxeter draw my attention 
on this book when I was his guest 
last November and I bought imme¬ 
diately a copy myself, which enjoys 
me immensely [sic]. I am since 
long an Alice fan, but since I read 
your annotations, many incompre¬ 
hensible details became clear! Cer¬ 
tainly I should be glad if my round 
colour-woodcut (which Coxeter 
calls ‘The Miraculous Draught of 
Fishes’ and which I entitle ‘Circle 
Limit III’) could be reproduced 
on the magazine’s cover.” 

This charming paragraph in a 
letter from M. C. Escher to Martin 
Gardner (Jan. 17, 1961) was in 
response to a note from Gardner 
asking for the artist’s permission 
to run some of his drawings in a 
“Mathematical Games” column 

(its subject was Canadian geom¬ 
eter H. S. M. Coxeter) and on the 
cover of Scientific American for the 
April 1961 issue (permission was 
granted). Escher went on to offer 
Gardner an original copy of the 
woodcut for $70, profusely apolo¬ 
gizing for its expensiveness. (It’s 
probably worth $40- to $50,000 
today.) They continued to corre¬ 
spond, which led to Gardner’s fa¬ 
mous April 1966 column devoted 
to the artist. Although Time and 
Life both had printed short articles 
about Escher in 1951, it was Gard¬ 
ner’s that launched the avalanche 
in the popularity of Escher’s work, 
which continues to this day. It is 
nice to note that it was Alice who 
paved the way. 

Further reading may be found 
in J. Taylor Hollist and Doris 
Schattschneider’s “M. C. Escher 
and C. v. S. Roosevelt” in M. C. 
Escher s Legacy: A Centennial Celebra¬ 
tion (Springer, 2003). 



Visitors to the wine country town/ 
hippie enclave of Sebastopol, 
California, are often delighted 
(or baffled) to see a virtual circus 
of large, whimsical, and colorful 
sculptures dotting the landscape 
and the streets. The art is provided 
by Patrick Amiot and his wife, 
Brigitte Laurent, and many Alice 
figures are among its characters. 
They love that their art can be ap- 


Photo © 2018 John F. Martin 

preciated by all, even those driving 
by in their cars. 

The couple came to Sebastopol 
from Montreal about twenty years 
ago. His sculptures come in two va¬ 
rieties: ceramic figures and “junk 
art” (made from found objects: car 
parts, watches, paint brushes, glass 
jars, whatever). All are one-of-a- 
kind, and all are hand-painted by 
Brigitte. He has made many dif¬ 
ferent versions of the various Alice 
characters in his “junk art” style, 
some of which are on display in his 
house and on his lawn. All of his 
pieces are cartoony, amusing, even 
laugh-provoking, but they evoke a 
certain sweetness as well. 

As we speak, he is in negotia¬ 
tions to buy an old carousel made 
by the Herschell Spillman Com¬ 
pany in the 1920s, thirty feet in 
diameter, to populate with Alice 
characters! Should this come to 
pass, watch these pages. Mean¬ 
while, do visit his work at patrick or throughout the wine 
country if you happen to be in 
Northern California. 



The Dutch Lewis Carroll Society 
(“Lewis Carroll Genootschap”) was 
established in The Netherlands 
in 1976, but during the past thirty 
years it has remained dormant 
with no activities. That changed 
on January 12, 2018, when the 
Society reconvened to hold a new 
symposium at the Koninklijke 
Bibliotheek (National Library of 
the Netherlands) in The Hague. 
Thirty-five friends of the Society 

The program began with an 
interesting tour in the National Li¬ 
brary with, of course, special atten¬ 
tion given to Alice in Wonderland. 
The first speaker was Floor Rieder, 
a well-known Dutch illustrator who 
has received many awards, and is 
popular in other countries, too, 
especially Germany. In 2014 she 
illustrated De avonturen van Alice in 

Wonderland & Alice in Spiegelland, a 
Dutch version of both Alice books. 
She discussed the choices she 
made for her illustrations and the 
techniques she used. In Rieder’s 
illustrations, Alice is a contempo¬ 
rary, entrepreneurial girl with a 
hoodie, sneakers, backpack, and 
eyeglasses. Rieder’s goal is to cre¬ 
ate illustrations attractive both to 
girls and boys. 

Fedde Bedictus was the second 
speaker. He is a friend of the So¬ 
ciety and author of the blog “The 
Tricycle down the Rabbit-hole” 
( His pre¬ 
sentation, “Alles in Wonderland,” 
was about whether our Dutch lan¬ 
guage is adequate to describe real¬ 
ity. Referring to Carroll’s article 
What the Tortoise Said to Achilles and 
examples from Alice’s Adventures 
in Wonderland , he explained what 
Godel, Escher, and Zen have in 
common. It was food for thought, 
and a topic that will certainly be 

Between these talks, a short 
version of Jan Svankmajer’s film 
Alice (Neco z Alenky) was shown. 

The Society then discussed its 
achievements and plans, and 
presented two new publications. 

A new journal, dodo/nododo, tijd- 
schrift in de geest van Lewis Carroll, 
is a significant indicator of the 
revival of the Dutch Lewis Carroll 
Society. It has a new name and a 
new design. The journal aims to 
promote Lewis Carroll and Alice 
and contains not only studies of 
Lewis Carroll’s life and work, but 
also original publications that 
perpetuate his spirit—contribu¬ 
tions with an original style and 
a special attention to language, 
puzzles, fantasy, and nonsense. Jur 
Koksma and Joep Stapel are the 
editors, and the designer is Mich- 
iel Terpelle. Two of the contribu¬ 
tions are in English: a logic essay 
on the reductio ad absurdum in the 
Alice books by the Dutch Society’s 
chair, Bas Savenije, and an inter¬ 
view with Brazilian artist Adriana 

Peliano, discussing twenty years of 
her work. 

The other publication, written 
by Henri Ruizenaar, contains six 
Dutch and two African translations 
of Jabberwocky. To come is a trans¬ 
lation of the dialogue between 
Alice and Humpty Dumpty about 
the famous first stanza. Also, Jur 
Koksma and Joep Stapel have 
composed a new Dutch translation 
of Jabberwocky especially for this 
edition. They wrote an accompa¬ 
nying essay about their “struggle 
with the Jabberwock” and the 
variety of solutions created by the 
different translators for the Jab¬ 
berwocky puzzle. The publication 
is designed by Iris Cousijnsen. 

For more information or to order 
these publications, visit www.lewis (see p.64). 



Goetz Kluge 

I interpret Lewis Carroll and 
Henry Holiday’s epic The Hunting 
of the Snark as a ballad about how 
man’s pursuit of happiness ends 
tragically when the struggle for the 
right path to the truth turns from 
legitimate dispute (Snark) into 
zealous fanaticism (Boojum). Too 
often, in the end, some seekers of 
happiness even get burned. 

That happened to Thomas 
Cranmer, a leader of the English 
Reformation and Archbishop of 
Canterbury during the reigns of 
Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Mary 
I. He was put on trial for treason 
and heresy and imprisoned for 
more than two years. Under pres¬ 
sure from Church authorities, he 
made several recantations, but he 
had to leave his 42 Protestant ar¬ 
ticles behind when, in the end, he 
was burned at the stake in 1556 by 
“Blood Mary,” who was Catholic. 

The Baker, the hero in The 
Hunting of the Snark, left 42 boxes 
behind him, with his name paint¬ 
ed clearly on each. A baker is ex¬ 
posed to heat. He answered to 
“Fry me!” or “Fritter my wig!” Inti- 


Figure i. Henry Holiday’s illustration to the final chapter of The 
Hunting of the Snark with the highlighted section rotated. 

Figure 2. Detail from Faith’s Victorie 

mate friends called him “Candle- 
ends” and his enemies “Toasted- 

In his poem, Carroll gives us 
a very broad hint: This Baker got 
burned. We can see the final burn¬ 
ing in Henry Holiday’s illustration 
to the last “fit” of the Snark poem 
(Figure 1). In the circled area, a 
part of the Boojum seems to have 
seized the Baker’s wrist. 

Compare that to Figure 2, show¬ 
ing the stake and the fire burning 
Thomas Cranmer (at right) and 
several other Protestant martyrs, 
a detail from the seventeenth- 
century engraving Faith’s Victorie in 
Rome’s Crueltie by Thomas Jenner 
(1631-1656). In both figures you 
see a hand in a fire. To me, this 
is the sad end of the hero of The 
Hunting of the Snark. 



Victor Fet 

Several generations of children 
in Russia grew up listening to the 
1976 LP record of Wonderland —an 
engaging audio musical loosely 
based on Nina Demurova’s transla¬ 
tion of Alice’s Adventures (1967). 
This version featured original 
songs by Vladimir Vysotsky (1938- 
1980), a stage and film actor, poet, 
and balladeer who was possibly the 
most important cultural figure of 
that time. The availability of his 


songs on the Wonderland record 
was a rare exception, since his 
poems were banned from publica¬ 
tion. But, sung by the author, they 
could be heard on magnetic tapes 
throughout Russia. His popularity 
was extraordinary across all social 

At the same time, in the 
Taganka Theatre in Moscow, 
Vysotsky, under the famous direc¬ 
tor Yuri Lyubimov (1917-2014), 
played the most fondly remem¬ 
bered Russian Hamlet. In Febru¬ 
ary 2018, to celebrate Vysotsky’s 
80th birthday, a new musical 
premiered in the Taganka, featur¬ 
ing the poet’s lyrics from the 1976 
record. The show is titled Begi, 
Alisa, Begi (Run, Alice, Run). It was 
directed by Maxim Didenko, with 
a new, original playscript by Valery 
Pecheykin, an impressive stage set 
by Maria Tregubova, and music by 
Ivan Kushnir. A selection of im¬ 

ages can be seen at tagankateatr. 

Didenko’s musical starts 
when the March Hare (played 
by Vysotsky’s son, Dmitry) an¬ 
nounces: “All rise! Court is in ses¬ 
sion!” and the viewers reluctantly 
rise. A stage poster says “Forward 
to the Dark Past!” In this gloomy 
and pensive version, complete 
with giant animal characters 
and psychedelic dancing, Alice 
is played by a team of three—a 
small girl, another girl a bit older, 
and an adolescent. There is also 
a fourth, zombie-like, character 
billed as “Alice of the Night,” who 
accompanies the evil Queen of 
Worms (Irina Aleximova) ( chervi , 
“worms” in Russian, is a homo¬ 
phone of the Hearts card suit). 

A lot has changed since Vysotsky 
wrote the lyrics, but the Knave-of- 
Hearts-style kangaroo courts go on 
in Russia, as those lyrics from the 
1976 record remind us: “The role 
of the masses is easy enough: just 
go down on your knees, what is 
the problem? Your King is respon¬ 
sible for everything—or a Queen.” 

Today, in Russia, trials of the¬ 
ater directors go on. Didenko’s 
friend Kirill Serebrennikov, who 
staged an absurdist opera of The 
Hunting of the Snark in 2012, is now 
under house arrest for alleged 
embezzlement. The charge is be¬ 
lieved to be politically motivated. 

- m - 


Chris Morgan 

This past February I visited the 
66th Annual Pacific Orchid Ex¬ 
position (aka POE, no relation to 
the man with the tell-tale heart) 
at the Hall of Flowers in Golden 
Gate Park, San Francisco. Or¬ 
chids are one of the two largest 
families of flowering plants, with 
about 28,000 currently accepted 
species. The theme for the 2018 
Exposition was “Curiouser and 
Curiouser: Orchids in Wonder¬ 
land.” It played off the story, and 
the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party was the 
main theme for the Gala. 

A large Mad Tea Party table was 
set up at the exhibit, and exhibi¬ 
tors showed great ingenuity in ap¬ 
plying Carrollian themes to their 
displays. One glassed-in display 
case featured a large blue caterpil¬ 
lar puffing out what appeared to 
be white smoke—but it was in fact 
a humidifier hose in disguise, used 
to keep the orchids from drying 
out. Several giant mushrooms also 
cropped up, and large, elaborate 
Carrollian sets were constructed to 
display hundreds of orchids. 

No one, it appears, thought 
to create a garden of live flowers, 
where orchids could call out to 
us as we moved past, wondering 
how we did it, or telling us ‘You’re 
beginning to fade, you know.” 

After roaming the show, I got 
the sense that POE exhibitors 
were just getting started: next year, 
Snark orchids pollinated by B’s! 

- m - 


Matt Crandall 

On April 5, 2018, the Australian 
Centre for the Moving Image 
(ACMI) in Melbourne opened its 
new exhibition entitled “Wonder¬ 
land.” This amazing presentation 
was more than three years in the 
making, borrowing from a num¬ 
ber of institutions and individu¬ 
als, including the Rosenbach, the 
Academy of Motion Pictures Arts 

and Sciences, and three members 
of the LCSNA. My wife and I were 
fortunate enough to be able to at¬ 
tend the opening week events and 
experience this wonderful show 
live and in person. 

The exhibition itself is a fantas¬ 
tic multimedia journey through 
(primarily) the world of Alice in 
moving pictures, i.e., film and 
television. Your journey begins by 
descending down a wide staircase 
into a very nice rendition of a 
Victorian parlor, presumably Mr. 
Dodgson’s. In here you receive 
your map of Wonderland, which is 
also your multimedia passport to 
unlocking several unique experi¬ 
ences along the way. The parlor is 
filled with books and letters, mostly 
on loan from the Rosenbach. 

The next stop is the hall of 
doors. Each door leads to a room 
filled with marvelous objects, 
film projection, and artifacts. Of 

special note are an 1865 Alice , the 
1866 copy inscribed by Carroll 
to Duckworth, and a number of 
items from his early youth. You 
can also watch the very first Alice 
film (courtesy of David Schaeffer). 

Once you find the correct door 
in the hall of doors, you proceed 
to the early film room. Here you 
will encounter an array of early 
theatre items, film or film-like 
items, and film memorabilia, 
including several very old magic 
lantern projectors. Here you may 
also interact with the first of the 
multimedia experiences activated 
by your map. By inserting the map 
so that the picture of Alice is com¬ 
plete, you receive a special ani¬ 
mated projection, one of several 
such throughout the exhibition. 

Proceeding on, you next enter 
The Pool of Tears, a round display 
table filled around the edges with 
magic lantern slides, with a large 
projection of one of the slides in 
the center. Many of these were 
only recently acquired by the mu¬ 
seum, and all are in very nice con¬ 
dition, but compared to the rest of 
the show, I found this room to be 
a little bit of a disappointment. 

The next stop is what might be 
called the mid-era film and televi¬ 
sion room, which contains artifacts 
from the 1933 Paramount Alice , 
the Irving Berlin Puttin ’ on the Ritz 
film, and some from television, in¬ 
cluding four Bob Mackie costumes 


from the Alice Through the Looking 
Glass 1966 NBC television musical. 
Perhaps my favorite piece is the 
fleur-de-lis staff that was held by 
Alice in the Paramount film. 

Moving every forward in time, 
you now enter the room devoted 
to experimental, art, and scary 
films. While I confess that I do not 
particularly care for many if not all 
the films represented, the amount 
of material that ACMI was able to 
assemble is just plain astounding, 
such as full sets and characters 
from the Svankmajer film like 
the creepy skull creature with the 
Santa hat, and the Mad Hatter and 
March Hare having tea—complete 
with real butter! This room also 
contains items from the Quay 
brothers 2007 film, the Bunin film 
(from David Schaeffer’s and Char¬ 
lie Lovett’s collections), and an 
extensive collection of Svankmajer 
illustrations for a Japanese book 
from 2006, Arisu in Wonderland 
(see p. 48). 

Now that you’ve left the night- 
mare-inducing room, it is time 
to enter the room that embodies 
the complete opposite: the Disney 

As I’m sure will come to no sur¬ 
prise to anyone, this was my favor¬ 
ite room. And not just because we 
lent them 90% of what’s in there. 
Ok, maybe. But still, it is an impres¬ 
sive room nonetheless. They did a 
great job of curating the items se¬ 
lected, depicting Alice’s evolution 
at Disney from the earliest Alice 
Comedies (1923-1926), through 
preproduction in the 1930s, all the 
way to the final animated film’s re¬ 
lease in 1951. They even managed 
to get permission from Disney for 
short film clip of Alice conversing 
with the Caterpillar, hence the 
name of the room: “Advice from a 
Caterpillar.” Also on display were 
some very nice pieces of art by 
David Hall and some equally lovely 
ones by Mary Blair. 

The next room is probably the 
most impressive by far: a full mul¬ 

timedia experience of the Mad 
Tea Party. You are seated around 
a large tea table, and the digital 
experience begins. It is truly as¬ 
tounding, and words cannot really 
do itjustice. 

Once you exit the Tea Party, 
you are invited into the Queen’s 
croquet ground for arts and crafts. 
Taking your Wonderland map, you 
can make a rendition of a Card 
using a wide variety of provided art 
materials, and paste them onto the 
back of your map. Once done, you 
take your map to the front, where 
both it and your face are scanned, 
and you are magically transported 
into the croquet ground as a Card 
Gardener, where you proceed to 
scamper about via your pasted 
avatar, painting the roses red. 

Next up is the world of Tim 
Burton. Again, surprisingly, ACMI 
was able to secure the loan of a 
fantastic array of items from Tim 
Burton’s film, including six full 
costumes and dozens of original 
props, set design, maquettes, and 

At the end of your journey 
through Wonderland, you are 
presented with a final multimedia 
experience, a large multiscreen 
project of clips from just about 
every Alice film, commercial, TV 
show, and reference in other films 
and TV shows—all set to music. It 
was quite entrancing. 

The exhibition is a truly master¬ 
ful feat, with only one weak spot, 
which is hardly worth mentioning. 
The thought, care, and attention 
to detail put into this event is 
nothing short of incredible. And 

that include the marketing as well. 
You can hardly walk down any Mel¬ 
bourne street without seeing flags, 
banners, posters, bus ads, streetcar 
ads, and overpass signage all pro¬ 
moting the exhibition. It is truly 
wondrous. Go see it if you can! 

Wonderland runs through October 7. 
There are associated screenings (e.g, an 
‘Alice Is Everywhere ” season through 
June 2), talks, “Wonderland Late 
Nights” (DJs, bands, and live art perfor¬ 
mances), and their website (www.acmi. is full of fascinating articles 
on a multitude of aspects of cinematic 
Alices (under the “Ideas” tab). 

- m - 


This bizarre-looking creature, 
noted on Wired’s Bug Girl’s Blog, is 
the Australian gum leaf skeleton- 
iser caterpillar, though entomolo¬ 
gists affectionately call it the Mad 
Hatterpillar because of the series 
of “heads” it grows in a stack. It’s 
not entirely clear why it does this. 
One theory is that birds might 
peck at the extra heads instead of 
the rest of the caterpillar. National 
Geographic notes that this is a very 
cost-effective defense, since the 
caterpillar just needs to keep a bit 
of its body that it would otherwise 
have discarded. Mad Hatterpillars 
believe their heads are a very good 
height indeed. They’re covered 
with protective spines that sting, 
so stay away from their tea parties 
when Down Under. 

Mad Hatterpillar, from 
Gwen Pearson’s blog at 
https://membracid. wordpress. 



To quote KL 77:35, “Online maga¬ 
zine on May 25, 2006, 
posted a gallery of faux ‘pulp 
fiction’ bookjackets for classics. 

... Their first was, of course, Alice 
in Wonderland , with a lurid char¬ 
treuse cover portraying a trashy, 
booted blonde, hands suspiciously 
placed, with the tagline ‘One 
girl’s drug-induced descent into 
dreamland debauchery.’” Well, 
truth is stranger than fiction. In 
2015, a company called “Pulp! The 
Classics” in the UK produced a 
tongue-in-cheek edition of Wonder¬ 
land with a puce and green cover 
featuring a Judy Garland looka- 
like, in hippie regalia, opening 
a bottle. The tagline proclaims, 
“This cupcake was off her head!” 

It goes into the category of cov¬ 
ers impossible to believe (before 
or after breakfast), along with 
Trevor Brown’s “maltalented and 
anapologetical exspuitation” ( KL 
65:20) and the Langham Hotel 
and Resort’s 2010 giveaway, with its 
come-hither blonde. ISBN 978-1- 


Juan Felipe Herrera 
Candlewick, 2018 
ISBN 978-0-7636-9264-3 (p) 
978-1-5362-0140-6 (h) 
Herrera, the U.S. poet laureate 
from 2015 to 2017, playfully extols 
the virtues of “jabberwalking,” a 
method of composition wherein 
one just scribbles down everything 
one hears, encounters, or hap¬ 
pens to think about whilst walk¬ 
ing around, sitting on a plane, 
whatever. Then, in several stages— 
lightheartedly “organizing” it, writ¬ 
ing it down on a newspaper page, 
and so on—one ends up with a 
genuine, frolicsome poem. Car- 
roll’s nonsense verse permeates 
this witty, exuberant book, which 
also includes some fantastic (in 
the literal sense) anecdotes about 
his dog, and many other “diver¬ 
sions and digressions.” Kirkus 
Review called it a “stream-of-con- 
sciousness, metafictive exploration 
of the poetic process.” In other 
words, fun stuff! 

- m - 

Caryl: Why Lewis Carroll 
Believed in Fairies 

Written and Illustrated 
by Byron Sewell 
Boojum Run Press, 2018 
ISBN 978-1974136278 

Cindy Watter 

Another unlikely but enjoyable 
tale of fantasy has sprung from the 
imagination of Byron Sewell. Caryl 
purports to be the true story of 
how Alice’s Adventures under Ground 
was composed. Purists may quib¬ 
ble over this latest origin story, 
interpreting it as disrespect for the 
creative genius of The Master, but 

it is an amusing tale, with allusions 
to “Rumpelstiltskin,” Sylvie and 
Bruno , A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 
and the characters in Alice’s Adven¬ 
tures in Wonderland. 

Caryl also features an introduc¬ 
tion by the redoubtable August A. 
Imholtz, Jr. Half of it is in Latin, 
and by St. Thomas Aquinas at 
that, but Imholtz kindly provides 
a translation for those of us who 
haven’t read a shred of Latin since 
1964. He also quotes Carroll’s 
mock-serious discussion of pixies 
from The Rectory Umbrella. (In fact, 
Lewis Carroll often wrote about 
fairies, and was interested in the 
supernatural.) The book opens 
with a Coleridgesque poem by 
Lewis Carroll called “Horrors,” in 
which the speaker is frightened 
by a monster with “a face of grim- 
mliest green.” It is a clue that the 
fairies in this book might not be 
adorable little sprites. Imholtz 
also points out that “Caryl” was 
the name of one of Alice Liddell 
Hargreaves’s sons, and that she 
had claimed to have found the 
name in a novel; it had nothing to 
do with her friendship with Lewis 
Carroll. Imholtz doesn’t buy that: 
“Upper-class British families were 
seldom so casual in naming their 

In Chapter 1, the fairy queen 
is depressed because her child is 
missing. (Trigger warning: It may 
have been devoured by Chessie, 
the Duchess’s cat.) Shrike, a crafty 
little elf, strikes a deal with the 
pregnant Frances Dodgson, and 
after some business with a chalk 
circle, and with some unnerv¬ 
ing obstetrical details (what the 
midwife knew!), she gives birth to 
twin boys, one of whom becomes a 
prince of Fairyland. 

Years later, the brothers be¬ 
come acquainted. If you ever won¬ 
dered if anyone other than CLD 
created Under Ground , here is one 
(im)possibility. The two brothers’ 
occasional mild wrangling over 
which of them thought of what is 
amusing, and the Carrollian fas- 


cination with mirror images has 
expression in the identical twins. 
Perhaps you want to know how the 
White Rabbit got its watch, or what 
was in the missing pages of the 
Diaries, or the roots of Carroll’s 
poem “My Fairy” Look no further. 

There are many allusions to 
characters and events in Carroll’s 
other books, especially Sylvie and 
Bruno, which comes in for gentle 
mockery. For example, several no¬ 
tions are set aside “for when I am 
very old and no longer have very 
good ideas.” These ideas will ap¬ 
pear in Sylvie and Bruno, the only 
conspicuous failure in the Carrol- 
lian canon. 

There are a few errors in punc¬ 
tuation and some misprints, but 
they are minor. A few anachronis¬ 
tic colloquialisms did not destroy 
my pleasure in the little book. 
However, I have believed many 
more than six impossible things 
before breakfast, but I still can¬ 
not accept that Charles Lutwidge 
Dodgson or Caryl the fairy prince 
ever said “OK.” (My good friend 
Humpty Dumpty agrees with me.) 

But those are trifles. Caryl is 
quite funny, and as a bonus, the 
short story “A Mississippi Snark 
Hunt,” complete with a reprint of 
a mysterious and truly bizarre vin¬ 
tage photograph, is included. In 
the photo, two dapper gentlemen, 
probably from a hundred years 
ago, are wearing remarkably tidy 
sports clothes (hats and ties), and 
holding—what? An alligator? An 
enormous catfish? A waterlogged 
portmanteau? A failed effort at 
taxidermy? A snark? Alas, I shall 
never know. 

- M - 

Mrs. White Rabbit 
Originally published as 
Madame le Lapin Blanc 
Written and illustrated 
by Gilles Bachelet 
Eerdmans Books for 
Young Readers 
ISBN 978-0-8028-5483 

Andrew Ogus 

A successful expansion of the 
world of Wonderland is always fun. 
In this delightful picture book, 
Gilles Bachelet imagines the White 
Rabbit as a married man (perhaps 
Alice was wrong and Mary Anne 
is his wife, not his servant?) with a 
large family and an important job 
at the royal palace, where his du¬ 
ties apparently include roistering 
with his colleagues. But this is Mrs. 
White Rabbit’s story (see illustra¬ 
tion below left ). 

She has snatched a few mo¬ 
ments from her busy day to write 
in her diary. And what does she 
write? A devoted mother, Mrs. 
Rabbit first reflects on her chil¬ 
dren, each characterized verbally 
and pictorially (one spread is dedi¬ 
cated to the hundred ways to cook 
carrots she has undertaken to 
tempt her would-be-fashion-model 
daughter); the more-or-less visible 
cat one of her sons has enthusiasti¬ 
cally adopted; and a certain young 
visitor. Mr. Rabbit’s suggestion that 
the latter be hired as a babysitter 
was not well received: “Who wants 
their children looked after by 
someone who doesn’t know how 
to stay a reasonable size?” 

The wedding of pictures and 
words seems happier than the 
marriage they describe. Hilariously 
detailed images include characters 
from both Alice books, rewarding 
close study as they expand and ex¬ 
plicate Bachelet’s tale. Every image 
is worth thousands of words, but 
Mrs. Rabbit’s voice is distinct and 
vivid. Her frustrations slowly seep 
in. In their gossipy town everyone 
knows everyone else and when she 
has bought a new hat—except her 
husband. Will he learn to appreci¬ 
ate his loving but disgruntled wife? 

Does he even know it’s her birth¬ 
day? Can this marriage be saved? 
Buy and read this wonderful book 
to find out! 


The Fish Chronicles 
Written and Illustrated 
by Byron Sewell 

I. Skinny Alice 

II. Comic Alice 

III. Pinball Alice 

Boojum Run Press, 2017-18 

Mark Burstein 

Byron Sewell’s offbeat trilogy in¬ 
volving homicidal Carrollian bib¬ 
liophiles was first privately printed 
under the auspices of Chicken 
Little’s Press in 2001 in an unil¬ 
lustrated edition of ten copies. 

It has been substantially revised, 
updated, and superbly illustrated, 
and is now available to the world 
via Amazon. 

The protagonist, Fish O’Feish, 
a wealthy, cold-blooded collector, 
will stop at nothing—multiple 
murders, arson, bribery, kidnap¬ 
ping—to get Carrollian rarities, 
particularly translations, comic 
books, crime fiction, curiosa, and 
erotica. Byron, a world-class col¬ 
lector himself, knows the territory, 
and one can only hope that Fish is 
a more than slightly exaggerated, 
rather than an accurate portrait of 
a typical member of our club. 

Fish is a well-traveled antihero: 
Skinny Alice takes place in Mexico, 
Argentina, and West Virginia; 

Comic Alice in South Carolina, West 
Virginia, and Texas; and Pinball 
Alice in Houston, West Virginia, 
and a fictitious LCSNA conference 
in Charleston. 

The pleasures of reading the 
books are twofold: one, the intrica¬ 
cies of the plot and well-delineated 
characters forming a picture of 
bibliomania at its most malevolent; 
and two, the joy of discovering the 
many insider references not only 
to the Alice books but to some of 
the stars in the LCSNA constella¬ 
tion. Byron’s reconstruction of an 


LCSNA meeting is priceless. Oc¬ 
casionally, worlds collide, as Byron 
often uses real people (e.g., Au¬ 
gust Imholtz, Karoline Leach) and 
characters based on them (e.g., 
Augie Imthern, Carolina Peach 
Fuzz) in the same scene. He is 
also humorously merciless in por¬ 
traying his, ah, less cultured West 
Virginia neighbors. 

All in all, a fine read, and the 
more one knows about the LCSNA 
and its denizens, the funnier it will 
be to you. 


Wonderland, & Looking-Glass 
Illustrated by Gennady Kalinovski 
Inky Parrot Press, 2017 

Andrew Ogus 

Gennady Kalinovski (1929-2006) 
was one of Russia’s most famous 
illustrators, with an oeuvre of 
ninety books. His great obsession 
was with Lewis Carroll’s two Alice 
books, even though it was politi¬ 
cally impossible to publish them 
until he was fifty. 

His first Wonderland , with 
black-and-white illustrations, was 
published in Russia by Detskaya 
Literatura in 1979; a new edition 
with color pictures was released 
by the same publisher in 1988. 

An exquisite yet inexpensive two- 
color reprint of both Alice books 
was released by Moscow’s Studio 
4+4 in 2011, with Russian text by 
Boris Zakhoder ( Wonderland) and 
Vladimir Orel ( Looking-glass ), both 
reviewed in KL 89:36. Now Inky 
Parrot has just published, with 
English text, fine editions of both 

books, sold individually or as a 
boxed set. Seeing the original Eng¬ 
lish words here is a delicious shock 
that makes one want to reread the 
books in the context of these very 
Russian illustrations. The special 
edition is enclosed in a handsome 
box; the striking self-portrait pasted 
on the outside is another bonus. 

In the “new” Wonderland , 
combining his brilliant illustra¬ 
tions to both earlier editions, lush 
watercolor enhances hilarious spot 
illustrations and lavish spreads. 
Looking-Glass s pictures remain 
black and white, but include ethe¬ 
real tone, unlike the earlier, purely 
linear, version. As in that edition, 
one is happily reminded of Stead¬ 
man and Searle. 

In both books the layout is 
imaginative and lively, with char¬ 
acters entering and exiting the 
pages. The typography is elegant 
throughout. The handsome 
chapter openers are particularly 
pleasing, successfully combining 
a spelled-out chapter number in 
black, a title, and an overprinted 
solid shape, with the first line of 
each chapter in matching color (a 
lovely idea this reviewer has never 
seen before). Kalinovski’s origi¬ 
nal designs remain: Wonderland 
simulates Victorian typography 
gone slightly mad; Looking-Glass 
combines huge Cyrillic letters and 
charming drawings. 

Wonderland is preceded by the 
artist’s own thoughts on illustra¬ 
tion and his process. “For me 
every new book, first of all, is a 
long creative process of inhabiting 
the world of the literary charac¬ 

ters, feeling the style of the writer, 
capturing the whole spirit of his 
creations.” He goes on to describe 
the white, bare room in which he 
thought out the pictures: “Only 
this way could I work: one to one 
with the book.” TTLG’s preface 
is a brief account of children’s 
book publishing in Soviet Russia 
by Ella Parry-Davis. While limits 
can be freeing, sometimes they 
can be stifling; these books were a 
way of allowing the artist’s creative 
imagination to flourish despite 
absurd restraints. Both sets of 
front matter include tantalizing 
samples of Kalinovski’s other work. 
His accomplishment is an astound¬ 
ing and beautiful addition to the 
catalogue of illustrated Alice s. 

Wonderland [168 pp, casebound 
continental style, 140 numbered cop¬ 
ies, £76]; Looking-Glass [168 pp, 
casebound continental style, 120 num¬ 
bered copies, £76]. The Special Edition 
gives you both books, quarter-leather 
bound continental style, and includes 
a numbered giclee print from each of 
the three editions, contained in a folder 
decorated with a printed rebus by Ka¬ 
linovsky, all in a solander box with a 
specially printed cover. There are 46 
numbered Special Editions available, 
£385. www. artists-choice-editions. 

- K - 

One Fun Day with Lewis Carroll 
A Celebration of Wordplay 
and a Girl Named Alice 

Kathleen Krull 
Illustrated by Julia Sarda 
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018 
ISBN 9780544348233 

Andrew Ogus 

The name of the man who con¬ 
ceived and wrote Alice’s Adven¬ 
tures under Ground was not called 
“Lewis Carroll.” Yet Kathleen Krull 
blithely refers to him as “Lewis” 
almost throughout this sprightly 
exploration of Alice’s creation in a 
book aimed at readers aged six to 
nine. He is at last correctly named, 
once, in a brief, straightforward 


biography following the text. What 
would the Rev. Charles L. Dodgson 
have made of such inaccurate fa¬ 

After a cheerfully imagined de¬ 
scription of Dodgson’s life (“Even 
after he grew into a prim and 
proper Victorian gentleman, Lewis 
still loved fun. He didn’t want any 
child feeling mimsy [sic] in his 
company. To amuse the children 
of his friends, he kept closets full 
of mechanical toys and dolls.”), 
the focus turns at last as promised 
to July 4, 1862—“a fine [sic] Fri¬ 
day,” but the actual date is uniden¬ 
tified. The other boaters are de¬ 
scribed as “a friend and the three 
daughters of another friend . . .’’Is 
Krull dodging Dodgson’s genuine 
affection for his child friends? A 
jumble of Alice’s adventures fol¬ 
lows, in which, in lieu of puns or 
jokes in “celebration of wordplay,” 
Krull whimsically forces coinages, 
phrases, and characters from both 
Alice books into inaccurate or 
confusing contexts: “His playful¬ 
ness with words sent [his siblings] 
into complete Jabberwocky.” [sic] 
“Sea creatures dance the Lobster 
Quadrille, while Alice interrupts 
a Mad Tea Party.” Or “‘Write it 
down!’ said the real Alice. She was 
ten and, like the Queen of Hearts, 
a bit bossy.” Hardly a celebratory 
view of a barely mentioned hero¬ 
ine, nor an authentic reflection of 
Dodgson’s own account. 

Sarda’s layered illustrations 
have a sophisticated, richly dark 
color palette and some attractive 
elements. Many are full-page. 

One of the boaters appears to be 
Xie Kitchen in Chinese costume. 
Duckworth is not pictured (or was 
he cut off in page makeup?). The 
jagged teeth of the unappetizing 
human characters are disturbing. 
But even given artistic license, 
it seems unlikely that Dodgson 
would have encouraged his sib¬ 
lings to practice archery indoors. 
(The juxtaposition of type and 
picture does work especially well 
on this particular spread.) A large 

black cat appears repeatedly. 
Finally noted as the Cheshire Cat 
within a group of identified char¬ 
acters, it is more frightening than 
the snail-like Snark. But what are 
the Tweedle brothers or the Snark 
even doing in a book about the 
creation of Under Ground? 

The modern fashion of color¬ 
izing and upsizing particular 
words does not help the text, 
despite a color-coded glossary. 

On four succeeding pages the 
thin sans serif type is sandwiched 
between horizontal borders of il¬ 
lustration for a visually rich pair of 
spreads—an interesting idea that 
might have appeared more often, 
and with better pacing. 

Who is the intended audience 
for this book? Six to nine year olds 
deserve the real text, not this con¬ 
fused and confusing hodge podge. 
Any child already familiar with 
the Alice books, or having even a 
casual knowledge of Dodgson’s 
life, would learn little from it. The 
novice reader might glean some¬ 
thing from the biography at the 
back. Dodgson did in fact grow up 
to be a “prim and proper Victorian 
gentleman.” But otherwise the 
characterizations of Dodgson and 
Alice strike even this Carrollian 
amateur as misleading, and the 
recap of Under Ground is bewilder¬ 
ing. Some of the illustrations may 
have some use, but neither the 
words nor the pictures accurately 
portray Dodgson, Carroll, or that 
rainy day in July. 

- m - 


The Bashkir translation announ¬ 
ced as available in KL 99 was deliv¬ 
ered in late April. 

Since our last issue, two titles have 
been released by Evertype press: 

La geste dAalis el Pais de Merveilles , 
Wonderland translated into Old 
French verse by May Plouzeau, 
with illustrations by Byron W. 
Sewell (ISBN 978-1-78201-174-3). 
Old French was spoken and/or 
written in many parts of what is 
now France, very roughly north 
of the Loire, and in parts of Bel¬ 
gium; it was also used in numerous 
circles in England, notably after 
the Norman Conquest. Its life 
extended roughly from the middle 
of the ninth century to some time 
in the fourteenth century. Aalis 
is rendered as a chanson de geste , 
versified in stanzas of assonanced 

Les paskeyes d Alice e pay is des 
merveyes , Wonderland translated 
into Central Walloon by Bernard 
Louis (ISBN 978-1782011736). 
Walloon is a regional Romance 
language from southern Belgium, 
dating back to 1600 and still spo¬ 
ken in Wallonia. Four types of Wal¬ 
loon can be identified: Western 
(from Charleroi; used by Jean-Luc 
Fauconnier for his 2012 Evertype 
translation), Eastern (from Liege), 
Central (from Namur), and South¬ 
ern (from the Ardennes region). 

Bridgette Mongeon with her sculpture (opposite) 


Photo by Bridgette Mongeon 


Renowned Spanish cartoonist, il¬ 
lustrator, and professor at the 
University of Granada Sergio 
Garcia Sanchez depicted the 
entire book of Wonderland in 
a single circular image, pub¬ 
lished in the New York Times 
Book Review on February 2, 


Bridgette Mongeon’s monumental 
tea-party sculpture, Move One Place 
On , is now fully installed in Ev¬ 
elyn’s Park in Bellaire, Texas, a 
suburb of Houston (opposite). 

She talked about it at our Spring 
2015 meeting in Austin ( KL 94:6), 
and now it’s open to the public. 
Within it are 150 hidden Carroll 

Noted illustrator Jane Breskin 
Zalben has a piece from one of 
her books on auction at New 
York’s Swann Galleries in June, 
showing Alice and Humpty- 
Dumpty. Zalben is also open to 
private sales if someone would like 
to contact her through www.jane 

- m - 


A one-day symposium, “Lewis Car- 
roll and George MacDonald: An 
Influential Friendship,” will take 
place at the Sussex (UK) Centre 
for Folklore, Fairy Tales and Fan¬ 
tasy on Saturday, September 1, 
2018. The deadline for their Call 
for Papers has passed. 

pigeon trade being banned in 
1993, the little dodo is also on the 
brink of extinction. Writes Jeremy 
Hance in “Caught in the Crossfire: 
Little Dodo Nears Extinction” in 
The Guardian (April 9, 2018), “A 
number of organisations have 
been involved in little dodo con¬ 
servation efforts including the 
Rufford Foundation, the 
Falease’ela Environment Protec¬ 
tion Society (a local NGO), the 
Auckland Zoo, the Darwin Initia¬ 
tive, and the Samoan govern¬ 
ment.” Its loss would disturb the 
ecosystem, as little dodos are cru¬ 
cial seed distributors, as well as 
deprive the world of another dodo 

“Near the end of the evening, 
[Salman] Rushdie lamented that 
no one memorizes poetry any¬ 
more,” the National Review re¬ 
ported about a book tour for 
Rushdie’s The Golden House 
(“Salman the Seer, Sort Of’ by 
Fred Schwarz, September 7, 2017). 
“At the moderator’s urging, he 

recited Lewis Carroll’s ‘The Wal- 
^ ^ rus and the Carpenter,’ start to 
finish, from memory.” 

On the “Culture” page of 
the BBC website on May 21, 
the results of a poll taken of 
108 “expert critics and writers 
around the globe” on “the 
100 stories that shaped the 
world” was announced. Top hon¬ 
ors, of course, went to The Odyssey; 
Wonderland came in at #44 (“Two 
places wrong,” as the Hatter would 



Reaching Down the Rabbit Hole is a 
fine title, although the book has 
nothing really to do with our Alice 
other than that and the subject, “a 
place where absurdities abound.” 
In the UK, the subtitle is “Extraor¬ 
dinary Journeys into the Human 
Brain”; it was published by Atlantic 
Books in 2015, and the paperback 
has the White Rabbit on the cover. 
On this side of the Pond, the sub¬ 
title was “A Renowned Neurologist 
Explains the Mystery and Drama 
of Brain Disease,” but the reprint 
offers the more dramatic “Tales of 
Life and Death on the Neurology 
Ward.” The American edition was 
published by St. Martin’s Press in 
2014, and the cover has a Dali- 
esque melting clock. The authors 
are Dr. Allan H. Ropper and 
Brian David Burrell (ISBN 978- 

“It’s a Wonderland Life,” by Au¬ 
gust A. Imholtz, Jr., with a fine 
illustration by Julian De Narvaez, 
paid tribute to Tufts University 
alumnus Morton Cohen in the Fall 
2017 issue of Tufts Magazine , in 
print and online. 

The tooth-billed pigeon ( Diduncu- 
lus strigirostris) is a Samoan bird 
also called the “little dodo,” and 
indeed it is a close genetic cousin 
of our Raphus cucullatus, as well as 
the also extinct Tongan tooth¬ 
billed pigeon. Despite the Samoan 

Renowned origamist Pasquale 
D’Auria’s take on Wonderland , 
using illustrations by La Studio 
and an adapted text by Alberto 
Bertolazzi, has been published by 
Dover (ISBN: 978-0486820965). 
Pat Olski’s crochet patterns for 
Wonderland make another Dover 
book (ISBN: 978-0486807348). 

National Book Award finalist 
Stitches: A Memoir (Norton, 2009), 
by Caldecott winner David Small, 
is a graphic novel of his painfully 
disturbing childhood, the dark¬ 
ness only relieved by his having 


“fallen in love with Alice.” His 
therapist is portrayed as the White 
Rabbit (ISBN: 978-0-393-33896-6). 

Alice in Wonderland Anthology: Writ¬ 
ing, Art & Photography Inspired by 
Lewis Carroll’s Classic Book \ Celebrat¬ 
ing 150 Years. In 2014, Silver Birch 
Press of Los Angeles issued a call 
for submissions, and this book, 
edited by Melanie Villines and 
published in 2015, is the result: a 
fine, colorful macedoine of 
poems, short stories, “creative 
nonfiction,” haiku, photographs, 
collages, paintings, drawings, and 
so forth (ISBN 978-0692608555). 

In My Holiday in North Korea: The 
Funniest/Worst Place on Earth, 
Wendy Simmons prefaces each 
chapter with a quote from AATW 
or TTLG. “These quotes perfectly 
capture the author’s feeling of 
having ‘fallen down a rabbit hole’ 
during her ten-day adventure,” 
writes Jan Johnson in The Colum¬ 
bian. North Korea and Wonder¬ 
land do have so much in common, 
from mass starvations to flamingo 
croquet (ISBN 978-0795347047). 

- m - 


A hearty welcome back to the 
Lewis Carroll Genootschap of the 
Netherlands, a sister society. After 
a flurry of meetings and publica¬ 
tions from 1976 to 1983, it softly 
and suddenly vanished away, only 
to reemerge in 2017. They have a 
fine website (lewiscarrollgenoots and several publications: 
dodo/nododo, a journal with several 
articles in English as well as Dutch; 
and Jabberwocky, which concen¬ 
trates on translations of the poem 
into Dutch. You can order them 
from their online shop. Wauwel- 
wok, their magazine from their ear¬ 
lier incarnation, is also available, 
but only as .pdf downloads. Also 
see p. 55. Welkom terug, vrienden! 

The first retrospective of the art of 
Charles San to re took place Febru¬ 
ary 17 through May 13, 2018, at 
Philadelphia’s Woodmere Mu¬ 
seum. It highlights his award-win¬ 
ning work, including illustrations 
for Alice’s Adventures Under Ground 
(Cider Mill, 2015) and Alice’s Ad¬ 
ventures in Wonderland (Cider Mill, 
2017; see reviews in KLs 96:42 and 

Digital photomontagist Maggie 
Taylor’s Looking-Glass companion 
to her superb Wonderland , the 
subject of Andrew Sellon’s glowing 
review ( KL 81:43), will be available 
at the end of May. The online 
photo-eye Gallery is showing six of 
her new images for sale, and the 
Catherine Couturier Gallery in 
Houston has many others and 
hosted an exhibition from April 7 
to May 12 of her Looking-Glass 
work. One hundred limited edi¬ 
tions were printed, each including 
an 8"x8" print of the cover image. 
To purchase one ($800), email 
or call (713) 524-5070. A trade 
edition was simultaneously pub¬ 
lished by Moth House Press (ISBN 

Two photographs of Alice Liddell 
by Lewis Carroll, an 1858 profile 
and an 1870 one of her looking 
miserable in a chair, were printed 
in The Guardian on March 1. The 
spread was accompanying a review 
of the National Portrait Gallery’s 
exhibition featuring the Victorian 
photographs of Julia Margaret 
Cameron, C. L. Dodgson, Clemen¬ 
tina Hawarden, and Oscar Rej- 

Rochester (NY) ’s annual Epilepsy- 
Pralid gala was “Chocolate Ball 
Themed” this February, featuring 
a production called “Rochester’s 
Adventures in Chocolate Land” 
(basically a chocolate version of 

The Australian Olympic Commit¬ 
tee’s new CEO has the birth name 
Lewis Carroll, though he goes by 
Matt. “Everyone has a bit of a 
chuckle,” Carroll said. “I’m always 

asked, ‘Written any books today?”’ 
Elsewhere in Other People Named 
Lewis Carroll News, on January 3, 
a man named Lewis Carroll III, 
whose middle name was, inevita¬ 
bly, “Lucky,” crashed into a tree at 
Tahoe’s Heavenly Ski Resort and 

- m - 


“Christ Church holds three dis¬ 
tinct collections of material relat¬ 
ing to Lewis Carroll, aka Charles 
Lutwidge Dodgson. These col¬ 
lections include a wide variety of 
material, from autograph letters 
and a wealth of manuscripts, origi¬ 
nal photographic prints, proof 
sheets and presentation copies, to 
a large number of editions of the 
Alice books in different languages. 

. . . The collections also include an 
impressive array of secondary ma¬ 
terial (biographies, books about 
various aspects of Carroll’s work, 
etc.) and are available for the use 
of researchers upon application 
to the Library. The whole corpus 
of the Lewis Carroll collection 
is currently the object of intense 
study and scrutiny, being reviewed 
and catalogued. This is a work in 
progress. A significant part of the 
Lewis Carroll collection has now 
been digitized. More will follow in 
due course. This project aims to 
provide an enhanced experience 
for viewers, allowing them to flip 
the pages, zoom in, and read very 
detailed descriptions.” 

- K - 


In season 2, episodes one and two, 
of TNT’s The Librarians, Prospero 
gets out of his book into the real 
world (we are delighted to see 
he is played by Richard Cox, who 
played the Hatter in the Joseph 
Papp/Liz Swados play Alice in 
Concert, filmed as Alice at the Pal¬ 
ace) . Even better, among the other 
fictional people whom Prospero 


unleashes is one whom Colonel 
Baird calls the Red Queen, only 
to have Jake Stone carefully cor¬ 
rect her that this is the Queen 
of Hearts. Getting a wink at this 
common mistake in a TV show was 
pretty terrific! 

In Adventures in Beauty Wonderland, 
Japanese pop surrealist Keiichi 
Tanaami crafts a 4:39-long psyche¬ 
delic anime “inspired by Lewis 
Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, un¬ 
veiling an underworld of kaleido¬ 
scopic cosmetics.” You can also 
“Enter wonDiorland with new Dior 
Addict fragrance fashion film 
starring Russian model Sasha 
Luss.” The new perfume is pro¬ 
moted as “a journey into fantasy 
world, an initiation to sensations 
and utter freedom. Filmmaker 
Harmony Korine and photogra¬ 
pher Ryan McGinley have por¬ 
trayed an Alice in Perfumeland—a 
free and sexy heroine with adven¬ 
turous nature.” In fact, she enters 
“WonDiorLand” through a look¬ 
ing-glass, but that’s a minor quib¬ 



David Del Tredici’s Child Alice, 

Part One of which— “In Memory 
of a Summer Day”—won the Pu¬ 
litzer in Music for 1980, has not 
been previously recorded. His 
large corpus of Alice works is well 
known, and one, Final Alice, en¬ 
gendered a best-selling recording 
by the Chicago Symphony on a 
1981 LP. We can now rejoice: The 
Boston Modern Orchestra Project 
has released a complete recording 
of Child Alice on a 2-CD set. Worry 
not, music lovers, this two-hour- 
plus composition for soprano and 
orchestra, although constantly 
shifting key and based entirely on 
just two themes, is sweetly melodic, 
earning the label neo-Roman tic. 
Opera News noted “the orgiastic 
overabundance of Del Tredici’s 
Mahlerian sonorities.” 

The rapper Little Simz released 
Stillness in Wonderland in late 2016, 
a concept album inspired by Alice 
in Wonderland. “The conceit is the 
biggest problem,” writes Katherine 
St. Asaph in her Pitchfork review, 
“there’s a limit to how many takes 
can be drawn from a book of Vic¬ 
torian math jokes and accompany¬ 
ing film of Disneyfied drugginess. 
Alice is also more suited to satire 
or farce—Carroll’s original idea— 
than serious subjects or earnest 
introspection, the two modes of 
this album.” The album contains 
several interludes with advice from 
the Cheshire Cat to “always follow 
the white rabbit,” and a track 
called “King of Hearts” with the 
lyric “Took the CH off Chip and I 
put it on Alice / Hit the chalice, 
now I’m in wonderland.” 

- m - 


Children’s Theatre Association of 
San Francisco presented Alice in 
Wonderland on Saturdays, February 
3-March 3 at the Cowell Theater 
in the Fort Mason Center for Arts 
and Culture. Also at Fort Mason, 
the Mark Foehringer Dance Proj¬ 
ect presented an Alice in Wonder¬ 
land for kids April 7-8 and 14-15; 
a cast of eight dancers, live musi¬ 
cians, and puppets did the honors. 

Peter and Alice, the 2013 play by 
John Logan, premiered in London 
with Judy Dench as Alice Liddell 
and Ben Whishaw as Peter Llewe¬ 
lyn Davies. It was performed in 
Minneapolis by the Candid The¬ 
ater Company from February 10 
through March 4. Logan’s script is 
available in paperback from 
Oberon Modern Plays. 

Alice + Steampunk + Bohemian 
Rhapsody + Dance = Alice in Steam- 
punk Wonderland. First choreo¬ 
graphed by the Midwest Regional 
Ballet in 2013, the production 
(featuring the music of Queen) 
returned to Pittsburg, Kansas, and 
Joplin, Missouri, last September. 
Reports the Joplin Globe, “The lyrics 

help add context to the story by 
giving additional meaning to the 
traditional story of ‘Alice’ . . . 
‘You’re My Best Friend’ enhances 
Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum, 
‘The Show Must Go On’ highlights 
a circus and makes a metaphor 
with growing up, and ‘Under Pres¬ 
sure’ underlines the stress felt by 
the White Rabbit.” 

BarnDoor Productions staged 
Daniel Rover Singer’s A Perfect 
Likeness (KL 90:2) in Perth, On¬ 
tario, last October 13-27. The play 
imagines a meeting of Dickens 
and Dodgson. 

Baltimore Center Stage had a 
high-wire production called 
Lookingglass Alice in November- 
December. “It incorporates gravity- 
defying aerobatics into the already 
imaginatively quirky world.” 

A “dark and disturbing new live- 
action cartoon called Jabberwockf 
was staged in Edmonton, Alberta, 
on November 26 by The Old Trout 
Puppet Workshop. The produc¬ 
tion, according to the Globe & 
Mail, was “about toxic masculinity 
of all things, how the messages 
boys receive about masculinity 
when they are young inhibit their 
ability to be happy as men.” 

The bawdy Rust Belt Theater in 
Youngstown, Ohio, presented a 
very adult Alice: A Curious Musical 
in May. 

- is - 


The Twisted Path Distillery and 
Dockl8 Cocktail Lab in Milwaukee 
offers a cocktail called “Eat Me 
Drink Me.” “Made with Twisted 
Path dark rum, house-made 
banana vermouth, house-made 
nocino (green walnut liqueur) and 
Bittercube Cherry Bark Vanilla 
bitters, it drinks like a Manhattan 
while mimicking elements of the 
flavor description of the elixir in 
Lewis Carroll’s novel, described as 
tasting of ‘cherry tart, custard, and 

6 5 


TRetor Ros^zryhzld @ in puzzRland" 




M I 


r lice in Puzzleland” was one of many 
themes used by puzzle editor Hector 
LRosenfeld (1858-1935) in his popular 
Ladies’ Home Journal puzzle column that ran in the 
early twentieth century. He was a founder of the Rid- 
dler’s Club, the New York City branch of the National 
Puzzlers’ League, and was known nationally as a pro¬ 
fessional puzzle maker and composer of thousands of 
charades, rebuses, crossword puzzles, and anagrams 
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. 

The use of the Alice theme reflects the wide¬ 
spread popularity of Carroll’s characters in America 
at the turn of the twentieth century, and their charm¬ 
ing repurposing to a new format. (At the time, the 
Journal also hired Alice illustrator Peter Newell to write 
articles about how to sew sofa pillows and bed quilts 
with Alice-themed designs.) Rosenfeld was adept at 
preserving the personas of Carroll’s characters, and 


was also a talented puzzle designer—his can be chal¬ 
lenging indeed. He was an intimate friend of Sam 
Loyd, the most famous puzzle maker of the nine¬ 
teenth century. (Interestingly, Loyd also ran a puzzle 
column, “Sam Loyd’s Own Puzzle Page,” in Woman’s 
Home Companion from 1903 through 1911, but very 
rarely used Carroll’s characters as themes.) 

We present one of Rosenfeld’s columns here. 
Since the columns were a connected series of chap¬ 
ters, each begins with comments on and answers to 
the previous column’s puzzles. In this November 1905 
entry, Alice is shown under a tree trying to solve the 
puzzle of a mysterious sign with letters on it, which 
must be cut into three pieces and reassembled to 
form a perfect square with a readable message. That 
puzzle is posed in the bottom-left paragraph of the 
page. We invite readers to try their hands at this tricky 
challenge! (Answers below.) 



L ^_ _ I HltT 

I V+.TC 

•7 \ . J jy I - ■ 1 

Mok Secjulfcur" by Wiley Miller, OuKe 4, Zoi 

wA:_«ifC7 r 

A Jl S® 

■rtyx. it 
























[HIE a ^ o - IK it 5 - ti»tl -J- 

= *ai| - m-- 9 [U| i|Uira 

= MmH □.¥■□] 3 —|- -j^ (tcJl ~ flFJag 

; a^wiifiin ir|loiraij 

.. . . . .... a iFm 

d=!hLd x3u{j 'Aii| jO frainioj xhm ifind >L|i u| nX\f aqj_ 

i| ipuiqp am Cii iMrai aty_ 

^inon j:,*. uf R*WI 

: L Uf|ihiC« *00. act]! 0 3d=;nrtJi x t -j\ Omi\ *t|i jr* xiuediI 41|i 

S 9 |zzn c | laqiuaAOjsj ai|j oj siaMsuy 


The Ladies' Home Journal for November 1905 


F T E R Alice 
had show n 
Dumpty, Tweedle¬ 
dum and Tweedle- 
dee how easily they 
could reach their 
bases without crossing each other’s path the 
twins objected to the way as being too round¬ 
about. Hut Humpty-Dumpty turned to them 
and said haughtily: “ I told you so. Never 
cross my path again,” whereupon Tweedle¬ 
dum and Tweedle-dee fell upon each other’s 
necks and sobbed themselves off the field. 
When they had disappeared Humpty-Dumpty 
said to Alice: “I knew it was that way, but I 
thought it was this way — like the simple 
puzzle of the two E’s — hence the saying, 
'too easy.’ ” 

Taking his slate he drew two capital E’s, 
back to back. “ This,” pointing to one, 44 is 
the way the E looked before it went through 
the looking-glass, and the other is after. 
Now, take my pencil and connect 1 with 1, 
2 with 2 and 3 with 3. without crossing a line, 
while I fetch you another charade,” and he 

While Alice was sitting down to work out 
the puzzle Peter suddenly asked her: 
44 By-the-way, have you a colledgucation? ” 

44 I don’t believe I know what that word 
means,” said Alice with a puzzled look. 

44 Why, that’s a lap-over word. We often 
use ’em when we want to save syllables.” 

14 Oh, I see now. You mean 4 college edu¬ 
cation.’ No, I haven’t had one, but Fraulein, 
our governess, has had one and she’s going to 
give it to me. Hut why do you ask? ” 

44 Because I want to take you to our school 
and want to know what class to begin with.” 

44 Let’s begin with the kindergarten and 
work our way up.” 

44 Very well. If you’ll excuse me I’ll go to 
find out if visitors are admitted today. If 
you get lonesome while I’m away you may 
study out the sign on this tree. In order to 
read it you must divide it into three pieces 
that can be fitted together to form a perfect 
square. Then the letters will appear in 
their proper order. Of course, I suppose 
you know what a square is?” 

Alice in Puzzleland 

By Hector Rosenfeld 

Drawings by Thomas Mcllvaine 

Alice was inclined to take offense at the 
question, but she thought better of it, though 
there was a slight sneer on her lips as she 
said: 44 A square is a figure of four equal sides 
and all right angles.” 

44 Is that so?” asked Peter in surprise. 
“I thought it was just something that you 
couldn’t make a circle of.” 

Alice was very fond of design puzzles, and 
she laid aside her E’s while she worked it 
out. It was not long before she deciphered the 
sign and had her answer 
and square ready for Peter 
when he returned. 

44 I declare, I never saw 
such remarkability,” said 
Peter with wide-open eyes. 

But Alice only smiled 
modestly and busied her¬ 
self with the Humpty- 
Dumpty puzzle. 

This being visitors’ day 
Peter conducted Alice to 
the schoolhouse which was 
close by. They had not 
gone very far before a flut¬ 
tering of wings overhead 
startled Alice ami she saw 
an airshipalight from which 
stepped her friend the 
Hatter. When he saw her 
he made a profound bow, 
after which he exclaimed: 

44 I am not mad, but soon 
shall be if six times six are 
thirty-three. He who sees 
his opportunity and seizes 
it is like the wind. He sees 
his, and he ceases not, 
therefore can I not find the 

44 To what are you seek in 
asked Alice interestedly. 

44 I find that with the wind behind me I can 
fly five miles in three minutes, but with the 
wind against me but three miles in five min¬ 
utes. Now, if the wind should cease, how far 
could I travel between breakfast and noon?” 

4 4 How early do you breakfast?” asked Alice. 

44 Sometimes early, sometimes late, but 
always at half-past seven.” 

Alice told him she would try to find the 
answer and send it to him, at which he hopped 
into his airship and flew away shouting: 

“ If six times six were thirty-three 

What would happen to eleven times three? " 

When Alice and Peter arrived at the school- 
house they were met by Humpty-Dumpty, 

who handed Alice the following charade, say¬ 
ing that he guessed the answer was Captain 
Kidd, because he was the only pirate he knew : 

" If a birdie meet a birdie 

Coming through the LAST, 

Should a birdie most unyielding 
To its FIRST hold fast? 

" The WHOLE a pirate bold was he, 

Who oft commandments broke: 

Lord help the ships he caught at sea — 
They found it was no joke.” 

As they were about to 
enter the school a troop of 
children swarmed out, it 
being the hour for recess. 
The teacher, however, met 
the visitors at the gate and 
told Peter to show Alice 
about until after recess, 
when she would join them. 

The first room they 
entered was the arithmetic 
class, and the blackboard 

an answer 

immediately attracted Alice. It bore ex¬ 
amples in 44 Pictorial Arithmetic.” 

44 What kind of arithmetic is that?” asked 

44 You use words instead of figures,” ex¬ 
plained Alice. 44 You add and subtract them 
just like numbers until you get the answer. 
See,” she said, pointing to the board, 44 there’s 
one example done to show how. Boat, plus 
Woman (equals B-o-a-t- 
w-o-m-a-n), minus Man 
(leaves B-o-a-t-w-o), minus 
Boa, leaves T-W-O, which 
is the answer. Oh, that’s 
fine,” delightedly ex¬ 
claimed Alice. 44 Let’s try 
the others.” and she sat 
down immediately, full of 
excitement, to work out 
the other three examples. 
Humpty-Dumpty, who 
hadn’t paid the slightest 
attention to Alice’s expla¬ 
nation, had meantime 
curled himself up on one of 
the benches and was now 
fast asleep, while Peter with 
a broad grin was painting 
little puzzle pictures all 
over his bald spots.